|Titre :||Personal tobacco pack display before and after the introduction of plain packaging with larger pictorial health warnings in Australia: an observational study of outdoor café strips (2014)|
|Auteurs :||M. ZACHER ; M. BAYLY ; E. BRENNAN ; J. DONO ; C. MILLER ; S. DURKIN ; M. SCOLLO ; M. WAKEFIELD|
|Type de document :||Article : Périodique|
|Dans :||Addiction (Vol.109, n°4, April 2014)|
|Article en page(s) :||653-662|
|Note générale :||Stand-alone commentary: Mcneill A., Brose L.S., Hitchman S.C. Addiction, 2014;109(5): p. 704-705. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/add.12538|
|Discipline :||SAN (Santé publique / Public health)|
Thésaurus TOXIBASETABAC ; AVERTISSEMENT SANITAIRE ; CATEGORIE SOCIO-PROFESSIONNELLE ; POLITIQUE ; COMPARAISON ; ATTITUDE
Aims: We tested whether prevalence of cigarette pack display and smoking at outdoor venues and pack orientation changed following the introduction of plain packaging and larger pictorial health warnings in Australia.
Methods: Between October and April 2011-12 (pre-plain packaging, pre-PP) and 2012-13 (post-plain packaging, post-PP), we counted patrons, smokers and tobacco packs at cafés, restaurants and bars with outdoor seating. Pack type (fully branded, plain or unknown) and orientation were noted. Rates of pack display, smoking and pack orientation were analysed using multi-level Poisson regression.
Results: Pack display declined by 15% [adjusted incident rate ratio (IRR) = 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.79-0.91, P Conclusions: Following Australia's 2012 policy of plain packaging and larger pictorial health warnings on cigarette and tobacco packs, smoking in outdoor areas of cafés, restaurants and bars and personal pack display (packs clearly visible on tables) declined. Further, a small proportion of smokers took steps to conceal packs that would otherwise be visible. Both are promising outcomes to minimize exposure to tobacco promotion.
|Domaine :||Tabac / Tobacco|
|Refs biblio. :||37|
|Affiliation :||Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Vic., Australia|