Hosting the Tobacco Industry Supply Chain and Political Interference.

INTRODUCTION: We found no comprehensive studies on the location of transnational tobacco and leaf company (TTLC) subsidiaries (business entities they control) or the consequences of their presence on health policy. AIMS AND METHODS: Here we assess (1) the global reach of TTLCs by mapping their tobacco growing and manufacturing subsidiaries and (2) the relationship between in-country presence of the tobacco industry and their power and interference. Data on subsidiaries were collated through systematic searching for countries' supply chain activities in documents and web pages. Cross-sectional multiple regression analysis was used to assess the association between the number of agricultural and manufacturing TTLCs and the Tobacco Industry Interference score, and the degree to which these were mediated by tobacco control, good governance, and economic importance of tobacco. RESULTS: TTLC supply chain activity had global reach. As the number of TTLCs with tobacco growing and manufacturing activities rose, interference increased significantly. Interference was associated with poorer tobacco control. The association with more TTLCs undertaking final product manufacturing was related to higher-value tobacco exports but was not related to tobacco making a bigger contribution to the economy. CONCLUSIONS: TTLCs continue to control the global tobacco supply chain through their globe-spanning subsidiaries. The presence of TTLCs in a country is associated with political interference. Countries should consider their participation in the tobacco supply chain alongside the understanding that they are likely to cede political power to TTLCs, potentially undermining the health of their populations. IMPLICATIONS: Tobacco control research has traditionally concentrated on the demand side of tobacco. Our results lend support to calls for more research on the supply of tobacco. Governments should require tobacco companies to provide detailed, up-to-date information in an easily accessible format on in-country supply chain activities. Policymakers should take the likelihood of political interference in health and environmental policy into account when making decisions about foreign direct investment offered by the tobacco industry.

The effect of alcohol tax changes on retail prices: how do on-trade alcohol retailers pass through tax changes to consumers?

The effectiveness of alcohol duty increases relies on alcohol retailers passing the tax increase on to consumers. This study uses sales data from a market research company to investigate tax pass-through over 11 years for on-premise retailers in England and whether this varies across the price distribution, for different beverage categories and outlet types. Panel data quantile regression analysis is used to estimate the impact of 12 excise duty changes and 3 sales tax changes between 2007 and 2017 on prices. We use product-level quarterly panel data from for 777 alcoholic products. We undertake the regression at all outlets level separating products are analysed in seven broad beverage categories (Beer, Cider, RTDs, Spirits, Wine, Sparkling Wine, and Fortified Wine). We further test sensitivity by disaggregating outlets into seven outlet types. For all seven broad beverage categories, we find that there exists significant differences in tax pass-through across the price distribution. Retailers appear to "undershift" cheaper beverages (prices rise by less than the tax increase) and subsidise this loss in revenue with an "overshift" in the relatively more expensive products. Future modelling of tax change impacts on population subgroups could incorporate this evidence, and this is important because different socio-economic and drinker groups purchase alcohol at different points on the price distribution and hence are affected differently by tax changes. Governments could also potentially incorporate this evidence into future impact assessments.

Quantile regression of tobacco tax pass-through in the UK 2013-2019. How have manufacturers passed through tax changes for different tobacco products?

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of tax increases relies heavily on the tobacco industry passing on such increases to smokers (also referred to as 'pass-through'). Previous research has found heterogeneous levels of tax pass-through across the market segments of tobacco products available to smokers. This study uses retail sales data to assess the extent to which recent tax changes have been passed on to smokers and whether this varies across the price distribution. METHODS: We use panel data quantile regression analysis on Nielsen commercial data of tobacco price and sales in the UK from January 2013 to March 2019 combined with official UK tax rates and inflation to calculate the rate of tax pass-through for factory made (FM) cigarettes and roll your own (RYO) tobacco. RESULTS: Following increases in the specific tax payable on tobacco, we find evidence of overshifting across the price distribution for both FM and RYO. The rate of the overshift in tax increased the more expensive the products were. This was consistent for FM and RYO. Additionally, our findings suggest that the introduction of standardised packaging was not followed by changes in how the tobacco industry responded to tax increases. CONCLUSIONS: Following the repeated introduction of increases in specific tobacco tax as well as standardised packaging, we show that the tobacco industry applies techniques to keep the cheapest tobacco cheaper relative to the more expensive products when passing on tax increases to smokers.

Longitudinal evaluation of the impact of standardised packaging and minimum excise tax on tobacco sales and industry revenue in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Standardised packaging for factory-made cigarettes (FM) and roll-your-own tobacco (RYO), and a minimum excise tax (MET) were fully implemented in the UK in May 2017 following a 12-month transition period. This paper is the first to examine effects on tobacco sales volumes and company revenues. METHODS: Analysis of UK commercial supermarket and convenience store electronic point of sale data on tobacco sales. FM and RYO products' data (May 2015-April 2018) yielded 107 572 monthly observations. Expected values from additive mixed modelling were used to calculate trends in: (1) volumes of tobacco sold overall, by cigarette type (FM and RYO) and by seven market segments; and (2) company net revenues. A 10-month period (June 2015-March 2016) before the transition to standardised packs was compared with a 10-month period after the introduction of the MET and full implementation of standardised packs (June 2017-March 2018). RESULTS: Postimplementation, the average monthly decline in stick sales was 6.4 million (95% CI 0.1 million to 12.7 million) sticks faster than prelegislation, almost doubling the speed of decline. Sales of cheap FM brands, previously increasing, plateaued after implementation. Company monthly net revenues declined from a stable £231 million (95% CI £228 million to £234 million), prelegislation, to £198 million (95% CI £191 million to £206 million) in April 2018. CONCLUSIONS: The concurrent introduction of standardised packaging and MET in the UK was associated with significant decline in sales and in tobacco industry revenues, and the end of the previous growth in cheap cigarette brands that appeal to young and price conscious smokers.

Standardised packaging, minimum excise tax, and RYO focussed tax rise implications for UK tobacco pricing.

BACKGROUND: Standardised packaging for factory made (FM) and roll your own (RYO) tobacco was fully implemented in the UK in May 2017. Around the same time, several changes to the tax system were applied (a Minimum Excise Tax (MET) for FM products and tax increases weighted towards RYO products). The tobacco industry claims that standardised packaging will lower prices (a disincentive for quitting) by commoditising the product, yet had itself taken advantage of the previous tax regime to achieve large profits from premium brands while also keeping some products' prices relatively low. Here we evaluate the impact of standardised packaging, the MET and the RYO focussed tax changes on price and industry profitability. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Nielsen electronic point of sale (EPOS) data (May 2015 to April 2018) were used to calculate real (inflation adjusted) monthly price per stick overall, by cigarette type (FM and RYO) and by seven market segments. Trend estimation, using additive mixed models, assessed weighted average price (weighted by volume of sales) and tobacco industry net revenue changes. The beginning and end of the data series were compared in terms of: (a) average monthly price growth, (b) average monthly net revenue growth, and (c) undershifting and overshifting patterns after tax changes. FM and RYO real prices changed little over the 3-year period-overall prices rose by about 1p per stick. There was no evidence of commoditisation with prices of all FM segments (but not RYO) rising faster after the implementation of standardised packaging than immediately beforehand. The prices of the cheapest FM brands rose with the implementation of the MET. RYO price increases did not close the gap to FM pricing levels despite RYO focussed tax increases. Tax changes following the implementation of standardised packaging and the MET were more widely and quickly passed on to smokers in the form of higher prices than the tax change pre-implementation. The main limitations are first that because we do not know the exact mechanism by which Nielsen scales up sample data to provide UK estimates, we could only use data for a set three year period during which the same adjustments are made. Second, the tax and standardised packaging events were sometimes too close in time to separate their consequences statistically. Third, tobacco prices may also be affected by external factors such as changes in smokers' disposable income or availability of electronic nicotine delivery systems. CONCLUSIONS: There was no long-term lowering of tobacco prices after the implementation of standardised packaging as predicted by the industry. The introduction of the MET was successful in increasing the price of the cheapest FM cigarettes and narrowing the price gap between FM brands. The RYO tax increases were, however, insufficient to narrow the price gap between RYO and FM. Overall, undershifting became less extensive indicating that tobacco industry manipulation of the tax system which had previously kept cheap products available had declined. This suggests that standardised packaging and a MET will likely contribute to further declines in UK tobacco use.

Individual-level behavioural smoking cessation interventions tailored for disadvantaged socioeconomic position: a systematic review and meta-regression.

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic inequalities in smoking cessation have led to development of interventions that are specifically tailored for smokers from disadvantaged groups. We aimed to assess whether the effectiveness of interventions for disadvantaged groups is moderated by tailoring for socioeconomic position. METHODS: For this systematic review and meta-regression, we searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, Cochrane Central Register, and Tobacco Addiction Register of Clinical Trials and the IC-SMOKE database from their inception until Aug 18, 2019, for randomised controlled trials of socioeconomic-position-tailored or non-socioeconomic-position-tailored individual-level behavioural interventions for smoking cessation at 6 months or longer of follow-up in disadvantaged groups. Studies measured socioeconomic position via income, eligibility for government financial assistance, occupation, and housing. Studies were excluded if they were delivered at the community or population level, did not report differential effects by socioeconomic position, did not report smoking cessation outcomes from 6 months or longer after the start of the intervention, were delivered at a group level, or provided pharmacotherapy with standard behavioural support compared with behavioural support alone. Individual patient-level data were extracted from published reports and from contacting study authors. Random-effects meta-analyses and mixed-effects meta-regression analyses were done to assess associations between tailoring of the intervention and effectiveness. Meta-analysis outcomes were summarised as risk ratios (RR). Certainty of evidence was assessed within each study using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool version 2 and the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation approach. The study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018103008. FINDINGS: Of 2376 studies identified by our literature search, 348 full-text articles were retrieved and screened for eligibility. Of these, 42 studies (26 168 participants) were included in the systematic review. 30 (71%) of 42 studies were done in the USA, three (7%) were done in the UK, two (5%) each in the Netherlands and Australia, and one (2%) each in Switzerland, Sweden, Turkey, India, and China. 26 (62%) of 42 studies were trials of socioeconomic-position-tailored interventions and 16 (38%) were non-socioeconomic-position-tailored interventions. 17 (65%) of 26 socioeconomic-position-tailored interventions were in-person or telephone-delivered behavioural interventions, four (15%) were digital interventions, three (12%) involved financial incentives, and two (8%) were brief interventions. Individuals who participated in an intervention, irrespective of tailoring, were significantly more likely to quit smoking than were control participants (RR 1·56, 95% CI 1·39-1·75; I2=54·5%). Socioeconomic-position-tailored interventions did not yield better outcomes compared with non-socioeconomic-position-tailored interventions for disadvantaged groups (adjusted RR 1·01, 95% CI 0·81-1·27; ß=0·011, SE=0·11; p=0·93). We observed similar effect sizes in separate meta-analyses of non-socioeconomic-position-tailored interventions using trial data from participants with high socioeconomic position (RR 2·00, 95% CI 1·36-2·93; I2=82·7%) and participants with low socioeconomic position (1·94, 1·31-2·86; I2=76·6%), although certainty of evidence from these studies was graded as low. INTERPRETATION: We found evidence that individual-level interventions can assist disadvantaged smokers with quitting, but there were no large moderating effects of tailoring for disadvantaged smokers. Improvements in tailored intervention development might be necessary to achieve equity-positive smoking cessation outcomes. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

UK tobacco price increases: driven by industry or public health?

BACKGROUND: Tobacco companies claim that higher taxes will force smokers into buying illicit tobacco, but if they were truly concerned about increasing illicit sales with higher prices they would only increase retail prices in line with changes in taxation. In this paper, we explore UK pricing of both factory-made cigarettes (FM) and roll-your-own tobacco (RYO) to explore the extent to which price increases were due to government tax rises or industry strategies to increase profit per pack. METHOD: Nielsen commercial data on UK tobacco sales data (2010-2015) were combined with official UK data on inflation and tax rates, to identify the source of real price increases. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2012, when there were unexpected large tax increases, industry driven price changes were small (16% of the price rise in FM and 20% in RYO), and changes were similar between market segments. Between 2013 and 2015, when tax increases were smaller and expected, industry behaviour generally accounted for a larger share of price rises (33% FM, 48% RYO), but changes varied considerably by segment. CONCLUSION: The industry has increased its prices beyond that required by tax changes, even when tax rises were larger and unexpected, although were notably smaller in such conditions. This suggests (1) that the industry is not actually concerned by the threat of illicit, especially since RYO had the highest levels of industry driven price increases despite higher levels of illicit, and (2) there remains scope for further tax increases, which should be relatively large and unexpected.

Stop Smoking Practitioners' understanding of e-cigarettes' use and efficacy with particular reference to vapers' socioeconomic status.

Introduction: We have undertaken four online surveys of Stop Smoking Service (SSS) practitioners in England, between 2011 and 2016, in order to enhance our understanding of e-cigarettes: a fast moving new phenomenon. It is important to understand whether e-cigarettes can ameliorate or exacerbate health inequalities given that smoking is one of the most serious causes of excessive mortality and morbidity among disadvantaged groups globally. Aims: To update findings of previous surveys and examine socioeconomic status differences in e-cigarette use and efficacy. Methods: Analysis was undertaken of electronic surveys, particularly, the most recent 2016 survey (n = 514) and 2015/16 SSS client routine monitoring data. Results: SSS practitioners were becoming more positive about e-cigarettes: 42% agreed that e-cigarettes were a good thing compared with 15% in 2011. Reported use of e-cigarettes among SSS clients was low (about 3%) despite higher quit rates (63% of clients reported being quit at four week follow-up, compared with 51% overall). Where socioeconomic differences in e-cigarettes' efficacy for quitting were identified, affluent and working smokers were advantaged. Conclusions: Low use of e-cigarettes by clients and practitioner opinions suggest that further education of SSS staff is needed if they are to adopt the current service recommendations about e-cigarettes.

Individualised tobacco affordability in the UK 2002-2014: findings from the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project.

OBJECTIVE: The existing measures of tobacco affordability (smokers' purchasing power for tobacco) use national estimates of income and average cigarette prices, and exclude roll-your-own (RYO) tobacco. This study developed an individualised measure of tobacco affordability using smokers' own incomes and factory-made (FM) or RYO tobacco purchase prices, and explored how it was impacted by taxation changes, individual characteristics and purchase patterns. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey data collated from 10 waves of a longitudinal cohort study. DATA SOURCES: Adult smokers (n=4062) from the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project United Kingdom (UK), surveyed between 2002 and 2014, providing 8943 observations over 10 surveys. ANALYSIS: Affordability was calculated as the percentage of annual income remaining with the individuals after their annual tobacco expenditure. Multilevel linear regression models were used with affordability as the outcome using time, sex, age, geographical region, ethnicity, education, nicotine dependence and tobacco purchase source as the predictor variables. RESULTS: Affordability of FM cigarettes decreased significantly from 91.5% (±95% CI: 91.0% to 91.9%) in 2002 to 87.8% (87.0% to 88.5%) in 2014; and RYO from 96.3% (95.7% to 96.9%) in 2006 to 93.7% (93.0% to 94.4%) in 2014. Affordability was significantly lower for FM than RYO. Year-on-year decreases were not statistically significant. Tobacco was more affordable for males, those with higher education, less dependent smokers and those purchasing from non-store (potentially illicit) or non-UK sources. CONCLUSIONS: An individualised measure of tobacco affordability provided useful insights on the impact of tobacco taxes, social inequalities and purchase patterns in the UK. Although tobacco became less affordable, the annual rate of decline was low, suggesting annual tax rises were not large enough.

Keeping smoking affordable in higher tax environments via smoking thinner roll-your-own cigarettes: Findings from the International Tobacco Control Four Country Survey 2006-15.

BACKGROUND: Roll-Your-Own tobacco (RYO) use is increasingly popular in many countries: it is generally cheaper than factory-made cigarettes (FM), and smokers can further reduce costs by adjusting the amount of tobacco in each cigarette. However, the level of risk of RYO compared with FM cigarettes is similar and does not meaningfully change with cigarette weight. We assessed the weight of tobacco in RYO cigarettes across jurisdictions with differing tobacco taxes/prices and over time. METHOD: Six waves of the International Tobacco Control 4 Country longitudinal study of smokers and recent ex-smokers, providing 3176 observations from exclusive RYO users covering 2006-15, are used to calculate the weight of tobacco used in RYO cigarettes in the US, Canada, Australia, and the UK. Multilevel regression analyses were used to compare weights across countries, socio-demographic factors, and over time. RESULTS: Smokers in the UK and Australia, where tobacco is relatively expensive, show higher levels of exclusive RYO use (25.8% and 13.8% respectively) and lower mean weights of tobacco per RYO cigarette (0.51 g(sd 0.32 g) and 0.53 g(0.28 g)), compared with both Canada and especially the US (6.0% and 3.5%, and 0.76 g(0.45 g) and 1.07 g(0.51 g)). Smokers in the UK and Australia also exhibited a statistically significant year-on-year decrease in the mean weight of each RYO cigarette. CONCLUSIONS: Taxation of RYO should increase considerably in the UK and Australia so that RYO and FM cigarettes are taxed equivalently to reduce RYO attractiveness and inequalities. Other measures to reduce the price differentials, including taxing RYO solely on weight, are also discussed.

Availability and Use of Cheap Tobacco in the United Kingdom 2002-2014: Findings From the International Tobacco Control Project.

Introduction: Raising tobacco prices is the most effective population-level intervention for reducing smoking, but this is undermined by the availability of cheap tobacco. This study monitors trends in cheap tobacco use among adult smokers in the United Kingdom between 2002 and 2014 via changes in product type, purchase source, and prices paid. Methods: Weighted data from 10 waves of the International Tobacco Control policy evaluation study were used. This is a longitudinal cohort study of adult smokers with replenishment; 6169 participants provided 15812 responses. Analyses contrasted (1) product type: roll-your-own (RYO) tobacco, factory-made packs (FM-P), and factory-made cartons (FM-C); (2) purchase source: UK store-based sources (e.g., supermarkets and convenience stores) with non-UK/nonstore sources representing tax avoidance/evasion (e.g., outside the UK, duty free, and informal sellers); and (3) prices paid (inflation-adjusted to 2014 values). Generalized estimating equations tested linear changes over time. Results: (1) RYO use increased significantly over time as FM decreased. (2) UK store-based sources constituted approximately 80% of purchases over time, with no significant increases in tax avoidance/evasion. (3) Median RYO prices were less than half that of FM, with FM-C cheaper than FM-P. Non-UK/nonstore sources were cheapest. Price increases of all three product types from UK store-based sources from 2002 to 2014 were statistically significant but not substantial. Wide (and increasing for FM-P) price ranges meant each product type could be purchased in 2014 at prices below their 2002 medians from UK store-based sources. Conclusions: Options exist driving UK smokers to minimize their tobacco expenditure; smokers do so largely by purchasing cheap tobacco products from UK stores. Implications: The effectiveness of price increases as a deterrent to smoking is being undermined by the availability of cheap tobacco such as roll-your-own tobacco and cartons of packs of factory-made cigarettes. Wide price ranges allowed smokers in 2014 to easily obtain cigarettes at prices comparable to 12 years prior, without resorting to tax avoidance or evasion. UK store-based sources accounted for 80% or more of all tobacco purchases between 2002 and 2014, suggesting little change in tax avoidance or evasion over time. There was a widening price range between the cheapest and most expensive factory-made cigarettes.

Tobacco industry strategies undermine government tax policy: evidence from commercial data.

OBJECTIVE: Taxation equitably reduces smoking, the leading cause of health inequalities. The tobacco industry (TI) can, however, undermine the public health gains realised from tobacco taxation through its pricing strategies. This study aims to examine contemporary TI pricing strategies in the UK and implications for tobacco tax policy. DESIGN: Review of commercial literature and longitudinal analysis of tobacco sales and price data. SETTING: A high-income country with comprehensive tobacco control policies and high tobacco taxes (UK). PARTICIPANTS: 2009 to 2015 Nielsen Scantrak electronic point of sale systems data. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Tobacco segmentation; monthly prices, sales volumes of and net revenue from roll-your-own (RYO) and factory-made (FM) cigarettes by segment; use of price-marking and pack sizes. RESULTS: The literature review and sales data concurred that both RYO and FM cigarettes were segmented by price. Despite regular tax increases, average real prices for the cheapest FM and RYO segments remained steady from 2013 while volumes grew. Low prices were maintained through reductions in the size of packs and price-marking. Each year, at the point the budget is implemented, the TI drops its revenue by up to 18 pence per pack, absorbing the tax increases (undershifting). Undershifting is most marked for the cheapest segments. CONCLUSIONS: The TI currently uses a variety of strategies to keep tobacco cheap. The implementation of standardised packaging will prevent small pack sizes and price-marking but further changes in tax policy are needed to minimise the TI's attempts to prevent sudden price increases.

Public health impacts of city policies to reduce climate change: findings from the URGENCHE EU-China project.

BACKGROUND: Climate change is a global threat to health and wellbeing. Here we provide findings of an international research project investigating the health and wellbeing impacts of policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in urban environments. METHODS: Five European and two Chinese city authorities and partner academic organisations formed the project consortium. The methodology involved modelling the impact of adopted urban climate-change mitigation transport, buildings and energy policy scenarios, usually for the year 2020 and comparing them with business as usual (BAU) scenarios (where policies had not been adopted). Carbon dioxide emissions, health impacting exposures (air pollution, noise and physical activity), health (cardiovascular, respiratory, cancer and leukaemia) and wellbeing (including noise related wellbeing, overall wellbeing, economic wellbeing and inequalities) were modelled. The scenarios were developed from corresponding known levels in 2010 and pre-existing exposure response functions. Additionally there were literature reviews, three longitudinal observational studies and two cross sectional surveys. RESULTS: There are four key findings. Firstly introduction of electric cars may confer some small health benefits but it would be unwise for a city to invest in electric vehicles unless their power generation fuel mix generates fewer emissions than petrol and diesel. Second, adopting policies to reduce private car use may have benefits for carbon dioxide reduction and positive health impacts through reduced noise and increased physical activity. Third, the benefits of carbon dioxide reduction from increasing housing efficiency are likely to be minor and co-benefits for health and wellbeing are dependent on good air exchange. Fourthly, although heating dwellings by in-home biomass burning may reduce carbon dioxide emissions, consequences for health and wellbeing were negative with the technology in use in the cities studied. CONCLUSIONS: The climate-change reduction policies reduced CO2 emissions (the most common greenhouse gas) from cities but impact on global emissions of CO2 would be more limited due to some displacement of emissions. The health and wellbeing impacts varied and were often limited reflecting existing relatively high quality of life and environmental standards in most of the participating cities; the greatest potential for future health benefit occurs in less developed or developing countries.

Evaluating Long-term Outcomes of NHS Stop Smoking Services (ELONS): a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: NHS Stop Smoking Services (SSSs) provide free at the point of use treatment for smokers who would like to stop. Since their inception in 1999 they have evolved to offer a variety of support options. Given the changes that have happened in the provision of services and the ongoing need for evidence on effectiveness, the Evaluating Long-term Outcomes for NHS Stop Smoking Services (ELONS) study was commissioned. OBJECTIVES: The main aim of the study was to explore the factors that determine longer-term abstinence from smoking following intervention by SSSs. There were also a number of additional objectives. DESIGN: The ELONS study was an observational study with two main stages: secondary analysis of routine data collected by SSSs and a prospective cohort study of service clients. The prospective study had additional elements on client satisfaction, well-being and longer-term nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) use. SETTING: The setting for the study was SSSs in England. For the secondary analysis, routine data from 49 services were obtained. For the prospective study and its added elements, nine services were involved. The target population was clients of these services. PARTICIPANTS: There were 202,804 cases included in secondary analysis and 3075 in the prospective study. INTERVENTIONS: A combination of behavioural support and stop smoking medication delivered by SSS practitioners. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Abstinence from smoking at 4 and 52 weeks after setting a quit date, validated by a carbon monoxide (CO) breath test. RESULTS: Just over 4 in 10 smokers (41%) recruited to the prospective study were biochemically validated as abstinent from smoking at 4 weeks (which was broadly comparable with findings from the secondary analysis of routine service data, where self-reported 4-week quit rates were 48%, falling to 34% when biochemical validation had occurred). At the 1-year follow-up, 8% of prospective study clients were CO validated as abstinent from smoking. Clients who received specialist one-to-one behavioural support were twice as likely to have remained abstinent than those who were seen by a general practitioner (GP) practice and pharmacy providers [odds ratio (OR) 2.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2 to 4.6]. Clients who received group behavioural support (either closed or rolling groups) were three times more likely to stop smoking than those who were seen by a GP practice or pharmacy providers (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.7 to 6.7). Satisfaction with services was high and well-being at baseline was found to be a predictor of abstinence from smoking at longer-term follow-up. Continued use of NRT at 1 year was rare, but no evidence of harm from longer-term use was identified from the data collected. CONCLUSIONS: Stop Smoking Services in England are effective in helping smokers to move away from tobacco use. Using the 52-week CO-validated quit rate of 8% found in this study, we estimate that in the year 2012-13 the services supported 36,249 clients to become non-smokers for the remainder of their lives. This is a substantial figure and provides one indicator of the ongoing value of the treatment that the services provide. The study raises a number of issues for future research including (1) examining the role of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) in smoking cessation for service clients [this study did not look at e-cigarette use (except briefly in the longer-term NRT study) but this is a priority for future studies]; (2) more detailed comparisons of rolling groups with other forms of behavioural support; (3) further exploration of the role of practitioner knowledge, skills and use of effective behaviour change techniques in supporting service clients to stop smoking; (4) surveillance of the impact of structural and funding changes on the future development and sustainability of SSSs; and (5) more detailed analysis of well-being over time between those who successfully stop smoking and those who relapse. Further research on longer-term use of non-combustible nicotine products that measures a wider array of biomarkers of smoking-related harm such as lung function tests or carcinogen metabolites. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme. The UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies provided funding for the longer-term NRT study.

Smoking Cessation and Socioeconomic Status: An Update of Existing Evidence from a National Evaluation of English Stop Smoking Services.

Smokers from lower socioeconomic groups are less likely to be successful in stopping smoking than more affluent smokers, even after accessing cessation programmes. Data were analysed from 3057 clients of nine services. Routine monitoring data were expanded with CO validated smoking status at 52-week follow-up. Backwards logistic regression modelling was used to consider which factors were most important in explaining the relationship between SES and quitting. The odds ratio of stopping smoking among more affluent clients, compared with more disadvantaged clients, after taking into account design variables only, was 1.85 (95% CI 1.44 to 2.37) which declined to 1.44 (1.11 to 1.87) when all controls were included. The factors that explained more than 10% of the decline in the odds ratio were age, proportion of friends and family who smoked, nicotine dependence, and taking varenicline. A range of factors contribute to lower cessation rates for disadvantaged smokers. Some of these can be modified by improved smoking cessation service provision, but others require contributions from wider efforts to improve material, human, and social capital.

Smoking patterns in Great Britain: the rise of cheap cigarette brands and roll your own (RYO) tobacco.

BACKGROUND: In Britain, the tobacco industry segments cigarettes into four price categories-premium, mid-price, economy and ultra-low-price (ULP). Our previous work shows that tobacco companies have kept ULP prices stable in real terms. Roll your own (RYO) tobacco remains cheaper still. METHODS: Analysis of 2001-08 General Household Survey data to examine trends in use of these cheap products and, using logistic regression, the profile of users of these products. RESULTS: Among smokers, the proportion using cheap products (economy, ULP and RYO combined) increased significantly in almost all age groups and geographic areas. Increases were most marked in under 24 year olds, 76% of whom smoked cheap cigarettes by 2008. All cheap products were more commonly used in lower socio-economic groups. Men and younger smokers were more likely to smoke RYO while women smoked economy brands. Smokers outside London and the South East of England were more likely to smoke some form of cheap tobacco even once socio-economic differences were accounted for. CONCLUSIONS: This paper demonstrates that cheap tobacco use is increasing among young and disadvantaged smokers compromising declines in population smoking prevalence. Thus, tobacco industry pricing appears to play a key role in explaining smoking patterns and inequalities in smoking.

Behavioural therapy for smoking cessation: the effectiveness of different intervention types for disadvantaged and affluent smokers.

BACKGROUND: Disadvantaged smokers are less likely to be successful when trying to stop smoking than more affluent smokers. In the UK, NHS Stop Smoking Services (SSS) provide a range of pharmacotherapy and behavioural support, delivered by advisors with a range of backgrounds. Whether the types of support provided and who provides it influence differences in quit rates amongst low SES smokers compared with high SES smokers has not previously been examined. METHODS: 202,084 records of smokers in England who attended a NHS Stop Smoking Service between July 2010 and June 2011 were acquired. Smokers were followed-up by services at four weeks post quit date. Multilevel logistic regression models of CO validated quits were employed. Disadvantage was explored through the National Statistics Socio-Economic Classification (NS-SEC) and by eligibility for free prescriptions, an indicator of low income amongst adults aged between 19 and 59 in England. RESULTS: Affluent smokers were more likely to quit than disadvantaged smokers (OR 1.38 (1.35 to 1.42) for clients who paid for prescriptions compared to those eligible for free prescriptions). 80% of service clients received one-to-one counselling but open group forms of behavioural therapy were more successful (main effect OR 1.26 (1.12 to 1.41)) except amongst some of the most disadvantaged clients (long-term unemployed and prisoners). Closed groups were little deployed and they were not significantly more successful than one-to-one behavioural therapy after controls. Who delivered treatment did make a difference for some clients, with all but the most affluent less likely to be successful if they had been treated by a nurse compared with other types of advisers, including smoking cessation specialists (main effect OR 0.73 (0.65 to 0.83)). CONCLUSION: This study provides further evidence that disadvantaged smokers find quitting more difficult even when they have attended a smoking cessation programme. The findings suggest that open groups should be promoted, although they may not be as effective as other forms of behavioural therapy for the long-term unemployed or prisoners. Further research is required to explore why most groups of smokers who attended services staffed by nurses were less likely to quit than those who received treatment from other types of advisors.

Evaluation of a drop-in rolling-group model of support to stop smoking.

AIMS: To assess longer-term outcomes of a drop-in rolling-group model of behavioural support for smoking cessation and the factors that influence cessation outcomes. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. SETTING: Fag Ends NHS Stop Smoking Service in Liverpool and Knowsley, UK. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2585 clients, aged 16 or over, setting a quit date. MEASUREMENTS: Routine monitoring data were collected from Fag Ends service users and were supplemented by survey data on socio-economic circumstances, smoking-related behaviour and self-report and carbon monoxide (CO)-validated smoking status at 52-week follow-up. FINDINGS: The CO-validated prolonged abstinence rate at 52 weeks for smokers attending the groups was 5.6%, compared with 30.7% at 4 weeks (a relapse rate of 78.2%). The sample was particularly disadvantaged: 68% resided in the most deprived decile of the English Index of Multiple Deprivation. Higher socio-economic status within the sample was a predictor of quitting. Other predictors of long-term cessation in multivariate analysis included older age, being female, lower levels of nicotine dependence, having a live-in partner, stronger determination to quit and use of varenicline versus other medication. CONCLUSIONS: A wholly state-reimbursed clinical stop-smoking service providing behavioural support and medication in a region of high economic and social disadvantage has reached a significant proportion of the smoking population. Long-term success rates are lower than are found typically in clinical trials, but higher than would be expected if the smokers were to try and quit unaided. Research is needed into how to improve on the success rates achieved.

Smoking and socioeconomic status in England: the rise of the never smoker and the disadvantaged smoker.

BACKGROUND: Since 2000 various tobacco control measures have been implemented in the UK. Changes in the smoking status of low and high socioeconomic status (SES) groups in England during this period (2001-08) are explored. METHODS: Secondary analysis of the Health Survey for England general population samples was undertaken. Over 88 000 adults, age 16 or over, living in England were included. Smoking status (current, ex or never) was reported. SES was assessed through a count of seven possible indicators of disadvantage: National Statistics Socio-Economic Classification (NSSEC), neighbourhood index of multiple deprivation, lone parenting, car availability, housing tenure, income and unemployment. RESULTS: Smoking rates were four times higher among the most disadvantaged [60.7% (95% CI: 58.2-63.3)] than the most affluent [15.3% (95% CI: 14.8-15.8)]. Smoking prevalence declined between 2001 and 2008 except among the multiply disadvantaged. This trend appeared to be due to an increase in never smoking rather than an increase in quitting. Disadvantage declined among non-smokers but not smokers. CONCLUSIONS: In general never smoking and affluence increased in England over this period. The disadvantaged, however, did not experience the decline in smoking and smokers missed out from the increase in affluence. Smoking and disadvantage may increasingly coexist.