US state cigarette tax increases and smoke-free legislation in relation to cigarette expenditure across household socio-economic circumstances: a quasi-experimental study

Smoking Behavior and Cigarette Expenditure in a Household: Evidence for Smoke-Free Houses Initiation in Indonesia

Background

The household is considered as a private area that is untouched tobacco control policies in developing countries, especially in Indonesia, which has not ratified the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) treaty.

Objectives

This study aims to identify smoking behavior and expenditure on cigarettes in the household, which are part of the initiation of a policy including a smoke-free home, so it assumes that the home is a public domain in Tegal Regency, Central Java Province, Indonesia.

Methods

This research is an observational study with a quantitative descriptive design. A total of 225 subjects in the seven regions designated as smoke-free areas were all selected as samples in this study and were willing to be the subject of research.

Results

The results found that 76.1% of smokers smoked with their nuclear family (wife/children/husband) present. Smoking behavior with the nuclear family inside the home (39.13%) and outside the home (36.96%) was more common than not smoking with the nuclear family. Expenditure for cigarettes per month was one-third of household revenue (IDR 607,521.74) based on the regency minimum wage (UMR) set by the local government.

Conclusions

The study concludes that smokers who smoke with family still lack knowledge on smoking's impact on health and household economics. The smoke-free regulation that is initiated should include households as a parameter.

Impact of price and non-price policies on household cigarette consumption and nutrient intake in smoking-tolerant Indonesia

OBJECTIVE

To examine the impact of cigarette price and smoking environment on allocation of household expenditure and its implication on nutrition consumption.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study was conducted using the 2014 National Socioeconomic Survey (SUSENAS), the 2014 Village Potential Survey (PODES) and the 2013 Basic National Health Survey (RISKESDAS). SUSENAS and PODES data were collected by the Central Bureau of Statistics. RISKESDAS was conducted by National Institute of Health Research and Development (Balitbangkes), Indonesian Ministry of Health (MOH).

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

The sample covered all districts in Indonesia; with sample size of 285 400 households. These households are grouped into low, medium and high smoking prevalence districts.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The impact of cigarette price and smoking environment on household consumption of cigarette, share of eight food groups, as well as calorie and protein intake.

RESULT

1% increase in cigarette price will increase the cigarette budget share by 0.0737 points and reduce the budget share for eggs/milk, prepared food, staple food, nuts, fish/meat and fruit, from 0.0200 points (eggs/milk) up to 0.0033 points (fruit). Reallocation of household expenditure brings changes in food composition, resulting in declining calorie and protein intake. A 1% cigarette price increase reduces calorie and protein intake as much as 0.0885% and 0.1052%, respectively. On the other hand, existence of smoke-free areas and low smoking prevalence areas reduces the household budget for cigarettes.

CONCLUSION

A pricing policy must be accompanied by non-pricing policies to reduce cigarette budget share.

Association of state tobacco control policies with active smoking at the time of intervention for intermittent claudication

OBJECTIVE

Active smoking among patients undergoing interventions for intermittent claudication (IC) is associated with poor outcomes. Notwithstanding, current levels of active smoking in these patients are high. State-level tobacco control policies have been shown to reduce smoking in the general US population. We evaluated whether state cigarette taxes and 100% smoke-free workplace legislation are associated with active smoking among patients undergoing interventions for IC.

METHODS

We queried the Vascular Quality Initiative database for peripheral endovascular interventions, infrainguinal bypasses, and suprainguinal bypasses for IC. Active smoking at the time of intervention was defined as smoking within one month of intervention. We implemented difference-in-differences analysis to isolate changes in active smoking owing to cigarette taxes (adjusted for inflation) and implementation of smoke-free workplace legislation. The difference-in-differences models estimated the causal effects of tobacco policies by adjusting for concurrent temporal trends in active smoking unrelated to cigarette taxes or smoke-free workplace legislation. The models controlled for age, sex, race/ethnicity, insurance type, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, state, and year. We tested interactions of taxes with age and insurance.

RESULTS

Data were available for 59,847 patients undergoing interventions for IC in 25 states from 2011 to 2019. Across the study period, active smoking at the time of intervention decreased from 48% to 40%. Every $1.00 cigarette tax increase was associated with a 6-percentage point decrease in active smoking (95% confidence interval, -10 to -1 percentage points; P = .02), representing an 11% decrease relative to the baseline proportion of patients actively smoking. The effect of cigarettes taxes was greater in older patients and those on Medicare. Among patients aged 60 to 69 and 70 to 79 years, every $1.00 tax increase resulted in 14% and 21% reductions in active smoking relative to baseline subgroup prevalences of 53% and 29%, respectively (P < .05 for both); however, younger age groups were not affected by tax increases. Among insurance groups, only patients on Medicare exhibited a significant change in active smoking with every $1.00 tax increase (an 18% decrease relative to a 33% baseline prevalence; P = .01). The number of states implementing smoke-free workplace legislation increased from 9 to 14 by 2019; however, this policy was not significantly associated with active smoking prevalence. At follow-up (median, 12.9 months), $1.00 tax increases were still associated with decreased smoking prevalence (a 25% decrease relative to a 33% baseline prevalence; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Cigarette tax increases seem to be an effective strategy to decrease active smoking among patients undergoing interventions for IC. Older patients and Medicare recipients are the most responsive to tax increases.