Estimated Public Health Gains From Smokers in Germany Switching to Reduced-Risk Alternatives: Results From Population Health Impact Modelling by Socioeconomic Group

R. Rytsar, S. Djurdjevic, Alexander K. Nussbaum, A. Kaul, Emanuel Bennewitz, P. N. Lee, J. Fry
{"title":"Estimated Public Health Gains From Smokers in Germany Switching to Reduced-Risk Alternatives: Results From Population Health Impact Modelling by Socioeconomic Group","authors":"R. Rytsar, S. Djurdjevic, Alexander K. Nussbaum, A. Kaul, Emanuel Bennewitz, P. N. Lee, J. Fry","doi":"10.2478/cttr-2022-0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary Background We previously estimated the impact of introducing heat-not-burn products and e-cigarettes in Germany on smoking-related disease mortality in men and women aged 30–79 years between 1995 and 2015. Here, we estimate the impact by socioeconomic group. Methods Individuals with a defined baseline cigarette smoking distribution were followed under a “Null Scenario” (no reduced-risk products) and “Alternative Scenarios” (reduced-risk products introduced). Transition probabilities allowed estimation of annual product use changes, with individual product histories used to estimate reductions in deaths and life-years lost. Here, however, individuals were classified into two socioeconomic groups defined by income and education, with allowance for variation by group in initial smoking prevalence and the probability of changing product use, or of changing socioeconomic group. Results With no allowance for socioeconomic group, deaths would have reduced by 217,000 (from 852,000 for continued smoking) had everyone immediately ceased smoking in 1995 and by 40,000 to 179,000 had one or two types of reduced-risk products – the heat-not-burn product and the e-cigarette – been adopted by smokers to varying extents. With such allowance, we estimate substantial drops in each socioeconomic group. Where all cigarette smokers switched immediately, half of them to heat-not-burn products, half to e-cigarettes, the estimated drops in deaths were 60,000 in group A (higher socioeconomic group) and 122,000 in group B (lower), about 82% of the drops associated with immediate cessation (73,000 in A and 148,000 in B). With more gradual conversion, the drops were 26,648 in A and 53,000 in B, about 35% of those from cessation. The drops in deaths and life-years saved were about 2 and 1.5 times higher in group B, respectively, associated with its greater numbers, older age, and higher smoking prevalence. The estimated reductions would increase upon considering more diseases, a wider age range, or longer follow-up. Methodological limitations would not affect the conclusion that introducing these products in 1995 in Germany could have substantially reduced deaths and life-years lost in both groups, more so in B. Conclusions Although cessation is optimal for reducing mortality, switching to reduced-risk products also provides substantial health gains. A public health approach encouraging lower socioeconomic group smokers to switch to reduced-risk products could diminish smoking-related health inequalities relative to continued smoking.","PeriodicalId":10723,"journal":{"name":"Contributions to Tobacco & Nicotine Research","volume":"237 1","pages":"52 - 67"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contributions to Tobacco & Nicotine Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/cttr-2022-0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Summary Background We previously estimated the impact of introducing heat-not-burn products and e-cigarettes in Germany on smoking-related disease mortality in men and women aged 30–79 years between 1995 and 2015. Here, we estimate the impact by socioeconomic group. Methods Individuals with a defined baseline cigarette smoking distribution were followed under a “Null Scenario” (no reduced-risk products) and “Alternative Scenarios” (reduced-risk products introduced). Transition probabilities allowed estimation of annual product use changes, with individual product histories used to estimate reductions in deaths and life-years lost. Here, however, individuals were classified into two socioeconomic groups defined by income and education, with allowance for variation by group in initial smoking prevalence and the probability of changing product use, or of changing socioeconomic group. Results With no allowance for socioeconomic group, deaths would have reduced by 217,000 (from 852,000 for continued smoking) had everyone immediately ceased smoking in 1995 and by 40,000 to 179,000 had one or two types of reduced-risk products – the heat-not-burn product and the e-cigarette – been adopted by smokers to varying extents. With such allowance, we estimate substantial drops in each socioeconomic group. Where all cigarette smokers switched immediately, half of them to heat-not-burn products, half to e-cigarettes, the estimated drops in deaths were 60,000 in group A (higher socioeconomic group) and 122,000 in group B (lower), about 82% of the drops associated with immediate cessation (73,000 in A and 148,000 in B). With more gradual conversion, the drops were 26,648 in A and 53,000 in B, about 35% of those from cessation. The drops in deaths and life-years saved were about 2 and 1.5 times higher in group B, respectively, associated with its greater numbers, older age, and higher smoking prevalence. The estimated reductions would increase upon considering more diseases, a wider age range, or longer follow-up. Methodological limitations would not affect the conclusion that introducing these products in 1995 in Germany could have substantially reduced deaths and life-years lost in both groups, more so in B. Conclusions Although cessation is optimal for reducing mortality, switching to reduced-risk products also provides substantial health gains. A public health approach encouraging lower socioeconomic group smokers to switch to reduced-risk products could diminish smoking-related health inequalities relative to continued smoking.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
估计德国吸烟者转向低风险替代品的公共卫生收益:社会经济群体人口健康影响模型的结果
我们之前估计了1995年至2015年间在德国引入加热不燃烧产品和电子烟对30-79岁男性和女性吸烟相关疾病死亡率的影响。在这里,我们估计了社会经济群体的影响。方法在“零情景”(无低风险产品)和“备选情景”(引入低风险产品)下,对具有明确基线吸烟分布的个体进行随访。转换概率可用于估计年度产品使用变化,并使用个别产品历史来估计死亡和生命年损失的减少。然而,在这里,个体被分为两个社会经济群体,根据收入和教育程度来定义,考虑到不同群体在初始吸烟率和改变产品使用的可能性方面的差异,或者改变社会经济群体。结果:在不考虑社会经济群体的情况下,如果1995年每个人都立即戒烟,死亡人数将减少217,000人(从继续吸烟的85.2万人),吸烟者在不同程度上采用一种或两种低风险产品-加热不燃烧产品和电子烟-将减少40,000至17.9万人。有了这样的考虑,我们估计每个社会经济群体的收入都会大幅下降。如果所有吸烟者都立即戒烟,其中一半改用加热不燃烧产品,一半改用电子烟,估计A组(社会经济水平较高的组)的死亡人数下降了6万人,B组(社会经济水平较低的组)的死亡人数下降了12.2万人,约占立即戒烟者的82% (A组为7.3万人,B组为14.8万人)。随着戒烟的逐渐转变,A组的死亡人数下降了26648人,B组为5.3万人,约占戒烟者的35%。B组的死亡率和寿命减少率分别是B组的2倍和1.5倍,这与B组人数较多、年龄较大和吸烟率较高有关。如果考虑到更多的疾病、更大的年龄范围或更长的随访时间,估计的减少将会增加。方法上的局限性不会影响以下结论:1995年在德国引入这些产品可以大大减少两组的死亡人数和寿命损失,b组的情况更甚。结论:虽然戒烟是降低死亡率的最佳选择,但改用低风险产品也会带来实质性的健康益处。鼓励社会经济地位较低群体吸烟者改用低风险产品的公共卫生办法可以减少与吸烟有关的与继续吸烟有关的健康不平等。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Comparative In Vitro Toxicological Screening of a Closed-End Heated Tobacco Product * Plasma Nicotine Pharmacokinetics of Oral Nicotine Pouches Across Varying Flavours and Nicotine Content * A Pumping Method for Assessing Airtightness of Packs - Application to Heated Tobacco Products * Purchase Intent and Product Appeal of Velo Nicotine Pouches Among Current Tobacco Users and Nonusers of Tobacco How do Risk Perceptions Drive Smokers to Completely Switch to a Smoke-Free Tobacco Product (IQOS™)? A Four-Country Cohort Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1