Asma e a nova lei do tabaco. O que mudou?

Change in the Prevalence and Social Patterning of First-and Second-Hand Smoking in PORTUGAL: A Repeated Cross-Sectional Study (2005 and 2014)

Between 2005 and 2007, important reinforcements of the tobacco legislation have been implemented in Portugal, which may have affected smoking patterns. The aim of this study was to measure the change in prevalence of first- and second-hand smoking (SHS) among adults, and its socio-demographic patterning in Portugal from 2005 to 2014. Data from the last two Portuguese National Health Interview Surveys (2005 and 2014) were used. The changes in daily smoking and SHS were measured using Poisson regressions, stratifying by sex and survey year. The inequalities were measured using relative inequality indexes (RII). From 2005 to 2014, there was a reduction in SHS (75%-54% among men, and 52%-38% among women), and a reduction in smoking among men (27%-26%), and an increase among women (9%-12%). SHS reduction was more marked among less privileged people. Among Portuguese men, inequalities in daily smoking have increased slightly, while among women the gap favoring low-educated reduced. Between 2005 and 2014, SHS decreased, but not daily smoking, particularly among women. Additionally, socioeconomic inequalities in smoking increased. Future policies should simultaneously tackle smoking and SHS prevalence, and their socioeconomic patterning. More comprehensive policies such as comprehensive national (non-partial) bans, combined with price increases could be more effective.

Impact of public health initiatives on acute coronary syndrome fatality rates in Portugal

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Every year cardiovascular disease (CVD) causes 3.9 million deaths in Europe. Portugal has implemented a set of public health policies to tackle CVD mortality: a smoking ban in 2008, a salt reduction regulation in 2010 and the coronary fast-track system (FTS) for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in 2007. Our goal in this study was to analyze the impact of these three public health policies in reducing case-fatality rates from ACS between 2000 and 2016.

METHODS

The impact of these policies on monthly ACS case-fatalities was assessed by creating individual models for each of the initiatives and implementing multiple linear regression analysis, using standard methods for interrupted time series. We also implemented segmented regression analysis to test which year showed a significant difference in the case-fatality slopes.

RESULTS

Separate modeling showed that the smoking ban (beta=-0.861, p=0.050) and the FTS (beta=-1.27, p=0.003) had an immediate impact after implementation, but did not have a significant impact on ACS trends. The salt reduction regulation did not have a significant impact. For the segmented model, we found significant differences between case-fatality trends before and after 2009, with rates before 2009 showing a steeper decrease.

CONCLUSIONS

The smoking ban and the FTS led to an immediate decrease in case-fatality rates; however, after 2009 no major decrease in case-fatality trends was found. Coronary heart disease constitutes an immense public health problem and it remains essential for decision-makers, public health authorities and the cardiology community to keep working to reduce ACS mortality rates.

Still Fighting for Breath: a patient survey of the challenges and impact of severe asthma

We conducted a large global survey, Still Fighting for Breath, in patients with severe persistent asthma, 10 years after the Fighting for Breath survey to assess the impact of disease on patients' lives and to determine if control and management have changed in recent years.

Data were collected from 1333 adults (aged >18 years) and caregivers of children (aged 6–17 years) with severe persistent asthma from nine countries through an online survey conducted in 2016 by GfK.

A decade after the first survey, our results showed that the impact of severe asthma has not changed significantly and a high proportion of patients with severe asthma remain inadequately controlled. A large discrepancy was observed between the proportion of patients who perceived their asthma to be well controlled (42%) and the proportion of patients who reported to be well controlled as per the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) assessment (6%). Although most patients perceived their asthma to be controlled, many experienced frequent symptoms that affected their daily lives.

Thus, there is a need for improved management (support and strategies) of patients with severe persistent asthma and improved coordination of efforts that would enable these patients to achieve better disease control.

There is a need for improved management of patients with severe persistent asthma to achieve better disease controlhttp://ow.ly/rv5K30mQdGG

Political climate and smoke-free laws in rural Kentucky communities

The purpose was to determine factors associated with rural communities' political readiness to enact smoke-free laws. Data from baseline assessment of a longitudinal intervention study to promote smoke-free policy in rural Kentucky communities; key informants (n = 144) and elected officials (n = 83) from 29 counties participated in cross-sectional telephone interviews. Controlling for population size and county-level smoking rate, the following factors predicted elected officials' perception of the likelihood of a local smoke-free law passing in the next 12 months: (1) support from the local board of health; (2) support from local leaders; and (3) smoke-free hospitals. Communities with lower adult smoking prevalence were more ready for smoke-free laws. Rural health advocates can increase political readiness for smoke-free laws by educating and engaging Board of Health members and local leaders, promoting the voluntary adoption of smoke-free policies in rural hospitals, and investing in effective population-based approaches to evidence-based tobacco treatment in rural communities.

Smokefree legislation: a review of health and economic outcomes research

CONTEXT

Smokefree legislation is a powerful public health intervention. Despite progress in smokefree legislation, over half of U.S. adults remain unprotected by comprehensive smokefree legislation.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

This paper reviews the scientific literature on health and economic outcome studies of smokefree legislation from the past decade, 2000 to early 2010, using MEDLINE and key search terms: smoking, smoking cessation, smoking/legislation and jurisprudence, smoking cessation/legislation and jurisprudence, and health policy.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

There is a wealth of research showing the health benefits to entire populations when communities implement comprehensive smokefree laws and/or regulations. These laws improve the health of hospitality workers and the general population by improving indoor air quality, reducing acute myocardial infarctions and asthma exacerbations, and improving infant and birth outcomes. Some studies report reduced smoking prevalence and cigarette consumption and improved cessation outcomes after smokefree legislation. In addition to the health benefits, economic studies confirm that smokefree laws do not adversely affect business revenues or operating costs.

CONCLUSIONS

While there is an abundance of smokefree policy outcomes research showing both the health and economic impacts of smokefree legislation, these outcomes may have more to do with implementation effectiveness than adoption, especially among subpopulations. An emerging body of literature documents not only that disparities in health protections remain among subpopulations, but that health outcomes of smokefree legislation may vary by gender, race/ethnicity, SES, and age. Further research is needed on implementation effectiveness of smokefree legislation and differential effects on subpopulations.

Legislative smoking bans for reducing secondhand smoke exposure, smoking prevalence and tobacco consumption

BACKGROUND

Smoking bans have been implemented in a variety of settings, as well as being part of policy in many jurisdictions to protect the public and employees from the harmful effects of secondhand smoke (SHS). They also offer the potential to influence social norms and smoking behaviour of those populations they affect.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the extent to which legislation-based smoking bans or restrictions reduce exposure to SHS, help people who smoke to reduce tobacco consumption or lower smoking prevalence and affect the health of those in areas which have a ban or restriction in place.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Conference Paper Index, and reference lists and bibliographies of included studies. We also checked websites of various organisations. Date of most recent search; July 1st 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered studies that reported legislative smoking bans and restrictions affecting populations. The minimum standard was having a ban explicitly in the study and a minimum of six months follow-up for measures of smoking behaviour. We included randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies (i.e. non-randomized controlled studies), controlled before and after studies, interrupted-time series as defined by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group, and uncontrolled pre- and post-ban data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Characteristics and content of the interventions, participants, outcomes and methods of the included studies were extracted by one author and checked by a second. Because of heterogeneity in the design and content of the studies, we did not attempt a meta-analysis. We evaluated the studies using qualitative narrative synthesis.

MAIN RESULTS

There were 50 studies included in this review. Thirty-one studies reported exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) with 19 studies measuring it using biomarkers. There was consistent evidence that smoking bans reduced exposure to SHS in workplaces, restaurants, pubs and in public places. There was a greater reduction in exposure to SHS in hospitality workers compared to the general population. We failed to detect any difference in self-reported exposure to SHS in cars. There was no change in either the prevalence or duration of reported exposure to SHS in the home as a result of implementing legislative bans. Twenty-three studies reported measures of active smoking, often as a co-variable rather than an end-point in itself, with no consistent evidence of a reduction in smoking prevalence attributable to the ban. Total tobacco consumption was reduced in studies where prevalence declined. Twenty-five studies reported health indicators as an outcome. Self-reported respiratory and sensory symptoms were measured in 12 studies, with lung function measured in five of them. There was consistent evidence of a reduction in hospital admissions for cardiac events as well as an improvement in some health indicators after the ban.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Introduction of a legislative smoking ban does lead to a reduction in exposure to passive smoking. Hospitality workers experienced a greater reduction in exposure to SHS after implementing the ban compared to the general population. There is limited evidence about the impact on active smoking but the trend is downwards. There is some evidence of an improvement in health outcomes. The strongest evidence is the reduction seen in admissions for acute coronary syndrome. There is an increase in support for and compliance with smoking bans after the legislation.