OBJECTIVES: To investigate the links between health warning labels (WLs) on cigarette packets and relapse among recently quit smokers. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal cohort survey. SETTING: Australia, Canada, the UK and the USA. PARTICIPANTS: 1936 recent ex-smokers (44.4% male) from one of the first six waves (2002-2007) of the International Tobacco Control 4-Country policy evaluation survey, who were followed up in the next wave. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Whether participants had relapsed at follow-up (approximately 1 year later). RESULTS: In multivariate analysis, very frequent noticing of WLs among ex-smokers was associated with greater relapse 1 year later (OR: 1.52, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.09, p<0.01), but this effect disappeared after controlling for urges to smoke and self-efficacy (OR: 1.29, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.80, p=0.135). In contrast, reporting that WLs make staying quit 'a lot' more likely (compared with 'not at all' likely) was associated with a lower likelihood of relapse 1 year later (OR: 0.65, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.86, p<0.01) and this effect remained robust across all models tested, increasing in some. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the first longitudinal evidence that health warnings can help ex-smokers stay quit. Once the authors control for greater exposure to cigarettes, which is understandably predictive of relapse, WL effects are positive. However, it may be that ex-smokers need to actively use the health consequences that WLs highlight to remind them of their reasons for quitting, rather than it being something that happens automatically. Ex-smokers should be encouraged to use pack warnings to counter urges to resume smoking. Novel warnings may be more likely to facilitate this.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the links between health warning labels (WLs) on cigarette packets and relapse among recently quit smokers. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal cohort survey. SETTING: Australia, Canada, the UK and the USA. PARTICIPANTS: 1936 recent ex-smokers (44.4% male) from one of the first six waves (2002-2007) of the International Tobacco Control 4-Country policy evaluation survey, who were followed up in the next wave. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Whether participants had relapsed at follow-up (approximately 1 year later). RESULTS: In multivariate analysis, very frequent noticing of WLs among ex-smokers was associated with greater relapse 1 year later (OR: 1.52, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.09, p<0.01), but this effect disappeared after controlling for urges to smoke and self-efficacy (OR: 1.29, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.80, p=0.135). In contrast, reporting that WLs make staying quit 'a lot' more likely (compared with 'not at all' likely) was associated with a lower likelihood of relapse 1 year later (OR: 0.65, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.86, p<0.01) and this effect remained robust across all models tested, increasing in some. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the first longitudinal evidence that health warnings can help ex-smokers stay quit. Once the authors control for greater exposure to cigarettes, which is understandably predictive of relapse, WL effects are positive. However, it may be that ex-smokers need to actively use the health consequences that WLs highlight to remind them of their reasons for quitting, rather than it being something that happens automatically. Ex-smokers should be encouraged to use pack warnings to counter urges to resume smoking. Novel warnings may be more likely to facilitate this.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cessation; addiction; advertising and promotion; end game; environmental tobacco smoke; health communication; media campaigns; nicotine reduction in cigarettes; older people and smoking; packaging and labelling; population health; public opinion polls; public policy; qualitative study; smoking topography; tobacco products
Authors: J K Ockene; K M Emmons; R J Mermelstein; K A Perkins; D S Bonollo; C C Voorhees; J F Hollis Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2000-01 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Ron Borland; Hua-Hie Yong; James Balmford; Jae Cooper; K Michael Cummings; Richard J O'Connor; Ann McNeill; Mark P Zanna; Geoffrey T Fong Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Ahmed I Fathelrahman; Maizurah Omar; Rahmat Awang; Ron Borland; Geoffrey T Fong; David Hammond; Zarihah Zain Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2009-02-26 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Hassan Mir; Daniel Buchanan; Anna Gilmore; Martin McKee; Salim Yusuf; Clara K Chow Journal: J Public Health Policy Date: 2011-03-03 Impact factor: 2.222
Authors: Jessica L Reid; David Hammond; Christian Boudreau; Geoffrey T Fong; Mohammad Siahpush Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Ron Borland; Hua-Hie Yong; Nick Wilson; Geoffrey T Fong; David Hammond; K Michael Cummings; Warwick Hosking; Ann McNeill Journal: Addiction Date: 2009-02-10 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Andrea C Villanti; Jennifer Cantrell; Jennifer L Pearson; Donna M Vallone; Jessica M Rath Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2013-11-08 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Melanie A Wakefield; Steven J Bowe; Sarah J Durkin; Hua-Hie Yong; Matthew J Spittal; Julie A Simpson; Ron Borland Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2012-09-04 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Sara C Hitchman; Pete Driezen; Christine Logel; David Hammond; Geoffrey T Fong Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2013-12-09 Impact factor: 4.244