Budgetary impact from multiple perspectives of sustained antitobacco national media campaigns to reduce the harms of cigarette smoking.

BACKGROUND: High-intensity antitobacco media campaigns are a proven strategy to reduce the harms of cigarette smoking. While buy-in from multiple stakeholders is needed to launch meaningful health policy, the budgetary impact of sustained media campaigns from multiple payer perspectives is unknown. METHODS: We estimated the budgetary impact and time to breakeven from societal, all-payer, Medicare, Medicaid and private insurer perspectives of national antitobacco media campaigns in the USA. Campaigns of 1, 5 and 10 years of durations were assessed in a microsimulation model to estimate the 10 and 20-year health and budgetary impact. Simulation model inputs were obtained from literature and both pubic use and proprietary data sets. RESULTS: The microsimulation predicts that a 10-year national smoking cessation campaign would produce net savings of $10.4, $5.1, $1.4, $3.6 and $0.2 billion from the societal, all-payer, Medicare, Medicaid and private insurer perspectives, respectively. National antitobacco media campaigns of 1, 5 and 10-year durations could produce net savings for Medicaid and Medicare within 2 years, and for private insurers within 6-9 years. A 10-year campaign would reduce adult cigarette smoking prevalence by 1.2 percentage points, prevent 23 500 smoking-attributable deaths over the first 10 years. In sensitivity analysis, media campaign costs would be offset by reductions in medical care spending of smoking among all payers combined within 6 years in all tested scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: 1, 5 and 10-year antitobacco media campaigns all yield net savings within 10 years from all perspectives. Multiyear campaigns yield substantially higher savings than a 1-year campaign.

Characteristics and Correlates of Recent Successful Cessation Among Adult Cigarette Smokers, United States, 2018.

We assessed characteristics and correlates of recent successful cessation (quitting smoking for 6 months or longer within the past year) among US adult cigarette smokers aged 18 years or older. Estimates came from the July 2018 fielding of the 2018-2019 Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey (N = 26,759). In 2018, 7.1% of adult smokers reported recent successful cessation. Recent successful cessation varied by certain demographic characteristics, noncigarette tobacco product use, smoke-free home rules, and receipt of advice to quit from a medical doctor. To help more smokers quit, public health practitioners can ensure that evidence-based tobacco control interventions, including barrier-free access to evidence-based cessation treatments, are reaching all tobacco users, especially those who face greater barriers to quitting.

State-Specific Cessation Behaviors Among Adult Cigarette Smokers - United States, 2014-2015.

This study assessed state-specific smoking cessation behaviors among US adult cigarette smokers aged 18 years or older. Estimates came from the 2014-2015 Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey (N = 163,920). Prevalence of interest in quitting ranged from 68.9% (Kentucky) to 85.7% (Connecticut); prevalence of making a quit attempt in the past year ranged from 42.7% (Delaware) to 62.1% (Alaska); prevalence of recently quitting smoking ranged from 3.9% (West Virginia) to 11.1% (District of Columbia); and prevalence of receiving quit advice from a medical doctor in the past year ranged from 59.4% (Nevada) to 81.7% (Wisconsin). These findings suggest that opportunities exist to encourage and help more smokers to quit.

Current Cigarette Smoking Among Adults - United States, 2016.

The U.S. Surgeon General has concluded that the burden of death and disease from tobacco use in the United States is overwhelmingly caused by cigarettes and other combusted tobacco products (1). Cigarettes are the most commonly used tobacco product among U.S. adults, and about 480,000 U.S. deaths per year are caused by cigarette smoking and secondhand smoke exposure (1). To assess progress toward the Healthy People 2020 target of reducing the proportion of U.S. adults aged ≥18 years who smoke cigarettes to ≤12.0% (objective TU-1.1),* CDC analyzed data from the 2016 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). In 2016, the prevalence of current cigarette smoking among adults was 15.5%, which was a significant decline from 2005 (20.9%); however, no significant change has occurred since 2015 (15.1%). In 2016, the prevalence of cigarette smoking was higher among adults who were male, aged 25-64 years, American Indian/Alaska Native or multiracial, had a General Education Development (GED) certificate, lived below the federal poverty level, lived in the Midwest or South, were uninsured or insured through Medicaid, had a disability/limitation, were lesbian, gay, or bisexual (LGB), or had serious psychological distress. During 2005-2016, the percentage of ever smokers who quit smoking increased from 50.8% to 59.0%. Proven population-based interventions are critical to reducing the health and economic burden of smoking-related diseases among U.S. adults, particularly among subpopulations with the highest smoking prevalences (1,2).

Current Cigarette Smoking Among Adults - United States, 2005-2015.

Tobacco use is the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the United States, and cigarettes are the most commonly used tobacco product among U.S. adults (1,2). To assess progress toward achieving the Healthy People 2020 target of reducing the proportion of U.S. adults who smoke cigarettes to ≤12.0% (objective TU1.1),* CDC assessed the most recent national estimates of cigarette smoking prevalence among adults aged ≥18 years using data from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). The proportion of U.S. adults who smoke cigarettes declined from 20.9% in 2005 to 15.1% in 2015, and the proportion of daily smokers declined from 16.9% to 11.4%. However, disparities in cigarette smoking persist. In 2015, prevalence of cigarette smoking was higher among adults who were male; were aged 25-44 years; were American Indian/Alaska Native; had a General Education Development certificate (GED); lived below the federal poverty level; lived in the Midwest; were insured through Medicaid or were uninsured; had a disability/limitation; were lesbian, gay, or bisexual; or who had serious psychological distress. Proven population-based interventions, including tobacco price increases, comprehensive smoke-free laws, anti-tobacco mass media campaigns, and barrier-free access to tobacco cessation counseling and medications, are critical to reducing cigarette smoking and smoking-related disease and death among U.S. adults, particularly among subpopulations with the highest smoking prevalences (3).

National and state prevalence of smoke-free rules in homes with and without children and smokers: Two decades of progress.

OBJECTIVE: The home is the primary source of secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure for children. We assessed national and state progress in smoke-free home (SFH) rule adoption in homes with and without children and adult smokers. METHODS: Data came from the 1992-1993 and 2010-2011 Tobacco Use Supplements to the Current Population Survey, a U.S. national probability household survey. Households were defined as having a SFH rule if all household respondents aged ≥18 indicated no one was allowed to smoke inside the home at any time. Households with children were those with occupants aged <18. Smokers were those who smoked ≥100 lifetime cigarettes and now smoked "everyday" or "some days". RESULTS: From 1992-1993 to 2010-2011, SFH rule prevalence increased from 43.0% to 83.0% (p<.05). Among households with children, SFH rules increased overall (44.9% to 88.6%), in households without smokers (59.7% to 95.0%), and households with ≥1 smokers (9.7% to 61.0%) (p<.05). Among households without children, SFH rules increased overall (40.8% to 81.1%), in households without smokers (53.4% to 90.1%), and households with ≥1 smokers (6.3% to 40.9%) (p<.05). Prevalence increased in all states, irrespective of smoker or child occupancy (p<.05). In 2010-2011, among homes with smokers and children, SFH rule prevalence ranged from 36.5% (West Virginia) to 86.8% (California). CONCLUSIONS: Considerable progress has been made adopting SFH rules, but many U.S. children continue to be exposed to SHS because their homes are not smoke-free. Further efforts to promote adoption of SFH rules are essential to protect all children from this health risk.

Receipt of evidence-based brief cessation interventions by health professionals and use of cessation assisted treatments among current adult cigarette-only smokers: National Adult Tobacco Survey, 2009-2010.

BACKGROUND: Helping tobacco smokers to quit during a medical visit is a clinical and public health priority. Research suggests that most health professionals engage their patients in at least some of the '5 A's' of the brief cessation intervention recommended in the U.S. Public Health Service Clinical Practice Guideline, but information on the extent to which patients act on this intervention is uncertain. We assessed current cigarette-only smokers' self-reported receipt of the 5 A's to determine the odds of using optimal cessation assisted treatments (a combination of counseling and medication). METHODS: Data came from the 2009-2010 National Adult Tobacco Survey (NATS), a nationally representative landline and mobile phone survey of adults aged ≥18 years. Among current cigarette-only smokers who visited a health professional in the past 12 months, we assessed patients' self-reported receipt of the 5 A's, use of the combination of counseling and medication for smoking cessation, and use of other cessation treatments. We used logistic regression to examine whether receipt of the 5 A's during a recent clinic visit was associated with use of cessation treatments (counseling, medication, or a combination of counseling and medication) among current cigarette-only smokers. RESULTS: In this large sample (N = 10,801) of current cigarette-only smokers who visited a health professional in the past 12 months, 6.3 % reported use of both counseling and medication for smoking cessation within the past year. Other assisted cessation treatments used to quit were: medication (19.6 %); class or program (3.8 %); one-on-one counseling (3.7 %); and telephone quitline (2.6 %). Current cigarette-only smokers who reported receiving all 5 A's during a recent clinic visit were more likely to use counseling (odds ratio [OR]: 11.2, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 7.1-17.5), medication (OR: 6.2, 95 % CI: 4.3-9.0), or a combination of counseling and medication (OR: 14.6, 95 % CI: 9.3-23.0), compared to smokers who received one or none of the 5 A's components. CONCLUSIONS: Receipt of the '5 A's' intervention was associated with a significant increase in patients' use of recommended counseling and medication for cessation. It is important for health professionals to deliver all 5 A's when conducting brief cessation interventions with patients who smoke.

Stuck in Neutral: Stalled Progress in Statewide Comprehensive Smoke-Free Laws and Cigarette Excise Taxes, United States, 2000-2014.

INTRODUCTION: Increasing tobacco excise taxes and implementing comprehensive smoke-free laws are two of the most effective population-level strategies to reduce tobacco use, prevent tobacco use initiation, and protect nonsmokers from secondhand smoke. We examined state laws related to smoke-free buildings and to cigarette excise taxes from 2000 through 2014 to see how implementation of these laws from 2000 through 2009 differs from implementation in more recent years (2010-2014). METHODS: We used legislative data from LexisNexis, an online legal research database, to examine changes in statewide smoke-free laws and cigarette excise taxes in effect from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2014. A comprehensive smoke-free law was defined as a statewide law prohibiting smoking in all indoor areas of private work sites, restaurants, and bars. RESULTS: From 2000 through 2009, 21 states and the District of Columbia implemented comprehensive smoke-free laws prohibiting smoking in work sites, restaurants, and bars. In 2010, 4 states implemented comprehensive smoke-free laws. The last state to implement a comprehensive smoke-free law was North Dakota in 2012, bringing the total number to 26 states and the District of Columbia. From 2000 through 2009, 46 states and the District of Columbia implemented laws increasing their cigarette excise tax, which increased the national average state excise tax rate by $0.92. However, from 2010 through 2014, only 14 states and the District of Columbia increased their excise tax, which increased the national average state excise tax rate by $0.20. CONCLUSION: The recent stall in progress in enacting and implementing statewide comprehensive smoke-free laws and increasing cigarette excise taxes may undermine tobacco prevention and control efforts in the United States, undercutting efforts to reduce tobacco use, exposure to secondhand smoke, health disparities, and tobacco-related illness and death.

Sociodemographic Disparities in Local Smoke-Free Law Coverage in 10 States.

OBJECTIVES: We assessed sociodemographic disparities in local 100% smoke-free laws prohibiting smoking in all indoor areas of nonhospitality worksites, restaurants, and bars in 10 states. METHODS: We obtained data on local 100% smoke-free laws (US Tobacco Control Laws Database) and subcounty characteristics (2006-2010 American Community Survey) for Alabama, Alaska, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, and West Virginia. Outcomes included (1) 100% smoke-free law covering restaurants, bars, and workplaces; (2) 100% smoke-free law covering restaurants, bars, or workplaces; and (3) number of venue types covered by 100% smoke-free laws (0-3). Sociodemographics included total population, urban status, percentage racial/ethnic minority, per capita income, percentage with high-school diploma, percentage with blue-collar jobs, and percentage of workers who live and work in the same locality. RESULTS: Across states, localities with less-educated residents, smaller proportions of workers living and working in the same locality, or both generally had lower odds of being covered by 100% smoke-free laws. Coverage varied across states for other sociodemographics. CONCLUSIONS: Disparities exist in local smoke-free law coverage. Identifying patterns in coverage can inform state efforts to address related disparities.

Vital signs: disparities in nonsmokers' exposure to secondhand smoke--United States, 1999-2012.

Exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) from burning tobacco products causes sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), respiratory infections, ear infections, and asthma attacks in infants and children, and coronary heart disease, stroke, and lung cancer in adult nonsmokers. No risk-free level of SHS exposure exists. SHS exposure causes more than 41,000 deaths among nonsmoking adults and 400 deaths in infants each year, and approximately $5.6 billion annually in lost productivity. Although population exposure to SHS has declined over the past 2 decades, many nonsmokers remain exposed to SHS in workplaces, public places, homes, and vehicles.

Current cigarette smoking among adults - United States, 2005-2014.

Tobacco smoking is the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the United States, resulting in approximately 480,000 premature deaths and more than $300 billion in direct health care expenditures and productivity losses each year (1). To assess progress toward achieving the Healthy People 2020 objective of reducing the percentage of U.S. adults who smoke cigarettes to ≤12.0%,* CDC assessed the most recent national estimates of smoking prevalence among adults aged ≥18 years using data from the 2014 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). The percentage of U.S. adults who smoke cigarettes declined from 20.9% in 2005 to 16.8% in 2014. Among daily cigarette smokers, declines were observed in the percentage who smoked 20­29 cigarettes per day (from 34.9% to 27.4%) or ≥30 cigarettes per day (from 12.7% to 6.9%). In 2014, prevalence of cigarette smoking was higher among males, adults aged 25­44 years, multiracial persons and American Indian/Alaska Natives, persons who have a General Education Development certificate, live below the federal poverty level, live in the Midwest, are insured through Medicaid or are uninsured, have a disability or limitation, or are lesbian, gay, or bisexual. Proven population-based interventions, including tobacco price increases, comprehensive smoke-free laws, high impact mass media campaigns, and barrier-free access to quitting assistance, are critical to reduce cigarette smoking and smoking-related disease and death among U.S. adults.

Smoke-free home and vehicle rules by tobacco use status among US adults.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence and characteristics of smoke-free home and vehicle rules by tobacco use. METHODS: Data came from the 2012-2013 National Adult Tobacco Survey, a telephone survey of adults aged ≥18. Respondents who reported smoking is 'never allowed' inside their home or any family vehicle were considered to have smoke-free home and vehicle rules, respectively. Prevalence and characteristics of smoke-free rules were assessed overall and by current tobacco use (combustible only, noncombustible only, combustible and noncombustible, no current tobacco use). Assessed characteristics included: sex, age, race/ethnicity, education, marital status, income, region, and sexual orientation. RESULTS: Nationally, 83.7% of adults (n=48,871) had smoke-free home rules and 78.1% (n=46,183) had smoke-free vehicle rules. By tobacco use, prevalence was highest among nonusers of tobacco (homes: 90.8%; vehicles: 88.9%) and lowest among combustible-only users (homes: 53.7%; vehicles: 34.2%). Prevalence of smoke-free home and vehicle rules was higher among males, adults with a graduate degree, and adults living in the West. CONCLUSIONS: Most adults have smoke-free home and vehicle rules, but differences exist by tobacco use. Opportunities exist to educate adults about the dangers of secondhand smoke and the benefits of smoke-free environments, particularly among combustible tobacco users.

Gradual reduction of cigarette consumption as a cessation strategy: prevalence, correlates, and relationship with quitting.

INTRODUCTION: Gradually reducing cigarette consumption is an approach used to quit smoking, but has not been widely studied at a population level. The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence and demographic characteristics of U.S. adult smokers who tried to reduce to quit, and the relationship between reducing and successful quitting. METHODS: Data came from 12,571 adults in the 2010-2011 Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey who tried to quit smoking in the past year. Frequencies and percentages were used to assess prevalence of reducing to quit; bivariate and multiple logistic regression models were used to assess correlates of reducing to quit and successful past year cessation. Analyses were conducted in SAS-callable SUDAAN. RESULTS: Among adults who tried to quit smoking in the past year, 43.0% (n = 5,444) tried reducing to quit. Compared to those who tried to quit without reducing consumption, those reducing to quit had a significantly higher prevalence of using counseling or medication (40.2% vs. 25.0%). In adjusted multivariable models, females (vs. males), Blacks (vs. Whites), current some day smokers (vs. every day smokers), and those who used counseling or medication had greater odds of trying to reduce to quit. Reducing to quit was negatively associated with successful past-year quitting (AOR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.48, 0.72). CONCLUSION: Reducing to quit is a common cessation strategy and, in these analyses, was associated with lower cessation success rates. More research on reducing to quit in a real-world setting is needed before widely recommending it as a cessation strategy.

Prevalence and correlates of switching to another tobacco product to quit smoking cigarettes.

INTRODUCTION: Using nationally representative data, we assessed the prevalence and correlates of cigarette smokers who tried switching to smokeless tobacco (SLT) or to other combusted tobacco (OCT) products to quit. METHODS: Data came from 12,400 current or former adult smokers who made a quit attempt in the past year and responded to the 2010-2011 Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey. Demographics and smoking characteristics were computed among those switching to SLT, switching to OCT, or trying to quit without using either strategy. Bivariate and multinomial logistic regression models identified correlates of using each strategy. RESULTS: Overall, 3.1% of smokers tried switching to SLT to quit, 2.2% tried switching to OCT, and 0.6% tried both strategies. Compared to those not using either switching strategy to try to quit, males were more likely than females to try switching to SLT or OCT; Blacks were less likely than Whites to try switching to SLT, but more likely to try switching to OCT; younger age groups were more likely to try switching to SLT or OCT; current someday smokers were more likely to have try switching to SLT (vs. everyday smokers), while recent former smokers were more likely to have tried switching to OCT. Both switching groups were more likely to have used cessation medication versus those not using switching strategies. CONCLUSION: Data suggest that switching to other tobacco products is a prevalent cessation approach; messages are needed to help clinicians encourage smokers who try to quit by switching to use evidence-based cessation approaches.

A National Asian-Language Smokers' Quitline--United States, 2012-2014.

INTRODUCTION: Until recently, in-language telephone quitline services for smokers who speak Asian languages were available only in California. In 2012, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funded the national Asian Smokers' Quitline (ASQ) to expand this service to all states. The objective of this study was to examine characteristics of ASQ callers, how they heard about the quitline, and their use of the service. METHODS: Characteristics of callers from August 2012 through July 2014 were examined by using descriptive statistics. We examined demographics, cigarette smoking status, time to first cigarette, how callers heard about the quitline, and service use (receipt of counseling and medication) by using ASQ intake and administrative data. We analyzed these data by language and state. RESULTS: In 2 years, 5,771 callers from 48 states completed intake; 31% were Chinese (Cantonese or Mandarin), 38% were Korean, and 31% were Vietnamese. More than 95% of all callers who used tobacco were current daily cigarette smokers at intake. About 87% of ASQ callers were male, 57% were aged 45 to 64 years, 48% were uninsured, and educational attainment varied. Most callers (54%) were referred by newspapers or magazines. Nearly all eligible callers (99%) received nicotine patches. About 85% of smokers enrolled in counseling; counseled smokers completed an average of 4 sessions. CONCLUSION: ASQ reached Chinese, Korean, and Vietnamese speakers nationwide. Callers were referred by the promotional avenues employed by ASQ, and most received services (medication, counseling, or both). State quitlines and local organizations should consider transferring callers and promoting ASQ to increase access to cessation services.

Prevalence of smokefree home rules--United States, 1992-1993 and 2010-2011.

Exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) from cigarettes causes an estimated 41,000 deaths among nonsmoking U.S. adults each year and an estimated $5.6 billion annually in lost productivity caused by premature death. In a 2006 report, the Surgeon General concluded that there is no risk-free level of exposure to SHS. Although an increasing proportion of the population is covered by state or local comprehensive smokefree laws that prohibit tobacco smoking in all indoor public places and worksites, including restaurants and bars, millions of nonsmokers continue to be exposed to SHS in areas not covered by smokefree laws or policies, including homes. The home is the primary source of SHS exposure for children and a major source of exposure for nonsmoking adults. To assess progress toward increasing the proportion of households with smokefree home rules, CDC analyzed the most recent data from the Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey. Households were considered to have a smokefree home rule if all adult respondents aged ≥18 years in the household reported that no one was allowed to smoke anywhere inside the home at any time. The analysis found that the national prevalence of smokefree home rules increased from 43.0% during 1992-1993 to 83.0% during 2010-2011. Over the same period, the national prevalence of smokefree home rules increased from 56.7% to 91.4% among households with no adult cigarette smokers and from 9.6% to 46.1% among households with at least one adult smoker. Enhanced implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., comprehensive smokefree laws, voluntary smokefree home rules, smokefree multiunit housing policies, and initiatives to educate the public about the health effects of SHS) is warranted to further reduce SHS exposure in the United States.

Exposure to secondhand smoke and attitudes toward smoke-free workplaces among employed U.S. adults: findings from the National Adult Tobacco Survey.

INTRODUCTION: This study assessed the prevalence and correlates of secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure and attitudes toward smoke-free workplaces among employed U.S. adults. METHODS: Data came from the 2009-2010 National Adult Tobacco Survey, a landline and cellular telephone survey of adults aged ≥18 years in the United States and the District of Columbia. National and state estimates of past 7-day workplace SHS exposure and attitudes toward indoor and outdoor smoke-free workplaces were assessed among employed adults. National estimates were calculated by sex, age, race/ethnicity, education, annual household income, sexual orientation, U.S. region, and smoking status. RESULTS: Among employed adults who did not smoke cigarettes, 20.4% reported past 7-day SHS exposure at their workplace (state range: 12.4% [Maine] to 30.8% [Nevada]). Nationally, prevalence of exposure was higher among males, those aged 18-44 years, non-Hispanic Blacks, Hispanics, and non-Hispanic American Indians/Alaska natives compared to non-Hispanic Whites, those with less education and income, those in the western United States, and those with no smoke-free workplace policy. Among all employed adults, 83.8% and 23.2% believed smoking should never be allowed in indoor and outdoor areas of workplaces, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: One-fifth of employed U.S. adult nonsmokers are exposed to SHS in the workplace, and disparities in exposure exist across states and subpopulations. Most employed adults believe indoor areas of workplaces should be smoke free, and nearly one-quarter believe outdoor areas should be smoke free. Efforts to protect employees from SHS exposure and to educate the public about the dangers of SHS and benefits of smoke-free workplaces could be beneficial.

National and state cost savings associated with prohibiting smoking in subsidized and public housing in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Despite progress in implementing smoke-free laws in indoor public places and workplaces, millions of Americans remain exposed to secondhand smoke at home. The nation's 80 million multiunit housing residents, including the nearly 7 million who live in subsidized or public housing, are especially susceptible to secondhand smoke infiltration between units. METHODS: We calculated national and state costs that could have been averted in 2012 if smoking were prohibited in all US subsidized housing, including public housing: 1) secondhand smoke-related direct health care, 2) renovation of smoking-permitted units; and 3) smoking-attributable fires. Annual cost savings were calculated by using residency estimates from the Department of Housing and Urban Development and cost data reported elsewhere. Data were adjusted for inflation and variations in state costs. National and state estimates (excluding Alaska and the District of Columbia) were calculated by cost type. RESULTS: Prohibiting smoking in subsidized housing would yield annual cost savings of $496.82 million (range, $258.96-$843.50 million), including $310.48 million ($154.14-$552.34 million) in secondhand smoke-related health care, $133.77 million ($75.24-$209.01 million) in renovation expenses, and $52.57 million ($29.57-$82.15 million) in smoking-attributable fire losses. By state, cost savings ranged from $0.58 million ($0.31-$0.94 million) in Wyoming to $124.68 million ($63.45-$216.71 million) in New York. Prohibiting smoking in public housing alone would yield cost savings of $152.91 million ($79.81-$259.28 million); by state, total cost savings ranged from $0.13 million ($0.07-$0.22 million) in Wyoming to $57.77 million ($29.41-$100.36 million) in New York. CONCLUSION: Prohibiting smoking in all US subsidized housing, including public housing, would protect health and could generate substantial societal cost savings.

Patient-reported recall of smoking cessation interventions from a health professional.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence and characteristics of current cigarette smokers who report receiving health care provider interventions ('5A's': ask, advise, assess, assist, arrange) for smoking cessation. METHODS: Data came from the 2009-2010 National Adult Tobacco Survey, a telephone survey of United States adults aged ≥ 18 years. Among current cigarette smokers who reported visiting a health professional in the past year (n=16,542), estimates were calculated overall and by sex, age, race/ethnicity, education, income, health insurance coverage, and sexual orientation. RESULTS: Among smokers who visited a health professional (75.2%), 87.9% were asked if they used tobacco, 65.8% were advised to quit, and 42.6% were asked if they wanted to quit. Among those wanting to quit, 78.2% were offered assistance and 17.5% had follow-up arranged. Receipt of the 'ask' component was lower among males and uninsured individuals. Receipt of the 'advise' and 'assess' components was lower among those aged 18-24 and uninsured individuals. Receipt of the 'assist' component was lower among non-Hispanic blacks. No differences were observed for the 'arrange' component. CONCLUSIONS: Many current smokers report receiving health care provider interventions for smoking cessation. Continued efforts to educate, encourage, and support all health professionals to provide effective, comprehensive tobacco cessation interventions to their patients may be beneficial.

National and state estimates of secondhand smoke infiltration among U.S. multiunit housing residents.

INTRODUCTION: Multiunit housing (MUH) residents are susceptible to secondhand smoke (SHS), which can infiltrate smoke-free living units from nearby units and shared areas where smoking is permitted. This study assessed the prevalence and characteristics of MUH residency in the United States, and the extent of SHS infiltration in this environment at both the national and state levels. METHODS: National and state estimates of MUH residency were obtained from the 2009 American Community Survey. Assessed MUH residency characteristics included sex, age, race/ethnicity, and poverty status. Estimates of smoke-free home rule prevalence were obtained from the 2006-2007 Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey. The number of MUH residents who have experienced SHS infiltration was determined by multiplying the estimated number of MUH residents with smoke-free homes by the range of self-reported SHS infiltration (44%-46.2%) from peer-reviewed studies of MUH residents. RESULTS: One-quarter of U.S. residents (25.8%, 79.2 million) live in MUH (state range: 10.1% in West Virginia to 51.7% in New York). Nationally, 47.6% of MUH residents are male, 53.3% are aged 25-64 years, 48.0% are non-Hispanic White, and 24.4% live below the poverty level. Among MUH residents with smoke-free home rules (62.7 million), an estimated 27.6-28.9 million have experienced SHS infiltration (state range: 26,000-27,000 in Wyoming to 4.6-4.9 million in California). CONCLUSIONS: A considerable number of Americans reside in MUH and many of these individuals experience SHS infiltration in their homes. Prohibiting smoking in MUH would help protect MUH residents from involuntary SHS exposure.