Amanda Fallin1, Torsten B Neilands2, Jeffrey W Jordan3, Pamela M Ling4. 1. Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; 2. Center for AIDS Prevention Studies, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; 3. Rescue Social Change Group, San Diego, CA; 4. Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA pling@medicine.ucsf.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals are more likely to smoke than the general population. This study evaluated a Social Branding intervention, CRUSH, which included an aspirational brand, social events, and targeted media to discourage smoking among LGBT young adults in Las Vegas, NV. METHODS: Cross-sectional surveys (N = 2,395) were collected in Las Vegas LGBT bars at 2 time points 1 year apart. Multivariate logistic regressions examined associations between campaign exposure, message understanding, and current (past 30 days) smoking, controlling for demographics. RESULTS: LGBT individuals were significantly more likely to report current (past 30 day) smoking than heterosexual/straight, gender-conforming participants. Overall, 53% of respondents reported exposure to CRUSH; of those exposed, 60% liked the campaign, 60.3% reported they would attend a CRUSH event on a night when they usually went somewhere else, and 86.3% correctly identified that the campaign was about "partying fresh and smokefree." Current smoking was reported by 47% of respondents at Time 1 and 39.6% at Time 2. There were significant interactions between time and campaign exposure and campaign exposure and understanding the message. Among those who understood the CRUSH smokefree message, the highest level of campaign exposure was significantly associated with 37%-48% lower odds for current smoking. CONCLUSIONS: While longitudinal studies would better assess the impact of this intervention, CRUSH shows promise to reduce tobacco use among LGBT bar patrons.
INTRODUCTION: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals are more likely to smoke than the general population. This study evaluated a Social Branding intervention, CRUSH, which included an aspirational brand, social events, and targeted media to discourage smoking among LGBT young adults in Las Vegas, NV. METHODS: Cross-sectional surveys (N = 2,395) were collected in Las Vegas LGBT bars at 2 time points 1 year apart. Multivariate logistic regressions examined associations between campaign exposure, message understanding, and current (past 30 days) smoking, controlling for demographics. RESULTS: LGBT individuals were significantly more likely to report current (past 30 day) smoking than heterosexual/straight, gender-conforming participants. Overall, 53% of respondents reported exposure to CRUSH; of those exposed, 60% liked the campaign, 60.3% reported they would attend a CRUSH event on a night when they usually went somewhere else, and 86.3% correctly identified that the campaign was about "partying fresh and smokefree." Current smoking was reported by 47% of respondents at Time 1 and 39.6% at Time 2. There were significant interactions between time and campaign exposure and campaign exposure and understanding the message. Among those who understood the CRUSH smokefree message, the highest level of campaign exposure was significantly associated with 37%-48% lower odds for current smoking. CONCLUSIONS: While longitudinal studies would better assess the impact of this intervention, CRUSH shows promise to reduce tobacco use among LGBT bar patrons.
Authors: J A Kelly; J S St Lawrence; Y E Diaz; L Y Stevenson; A C Hauth; T L Brasfield; S C Kalichman; J E Smith; M E Andrew Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 1991-02 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Sara Kalkhoran; Nadra E Lisha; Torsten B Neilands; Jeffrey W Jordan; Pamela M Ling Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2016-06-03 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Andy S L Tan; Cabral A Bigman; Rebekah H Nagler; Sara Minsky; Kasisomayajula Viswanath Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2017-09-02 Impact factor: 2.532