The Brazil SimSmoke Policy Simulation Model: The Effect of Strong Tobacco Control Policies on Smoking Prevalence and Smoking-Attributable Deaths in a Middle Income Nation

English version České info

Background:
Brazil has reduced its smoking rate by about 50% in the last 20 y. During that time period, strong tobacco control policies were implemented. This paper estimates the effect of these stricter policies on smoking prevalence and associated premature mortality, and the effect that additional policies may have.

Methods and Findings:
The model was developed using the SimSmoke tobacco control policy model. Using policy, population, and smoking data for Brazil, the model assesses the effect on premature deaths of cigarette taxes, smoke-free air laws, mass media campaigns, marketing restrictions, packaging requirements, cessation treatment programs, and youth access restrictions. We estimate the effect of past policies relative to a counterfactual of policies kept to 1989 levels, and the effect of stricter future policies. Male and female smoking prevalence in Brazil have fallen by about half since 1989, which represents a 46% (lower and upper bounds: 28%–66%) relative reduction compared to the 2010 prevalence under the counterfactual scenario of policies held to 1989 levels. Almost half of that 46% reduction is explained by price increases, 14% by smoke-free air laws, 14% by marketing restrictions, 8% by health warnings, 6% by mass media campaigns, and 10% by cessation treatment programs. As a result of the past policies, a total of almost 420,000 (260,000–715,000) deaths had been averted by 2010, increasing to almost 7 million (4.5 million–10.3 million) deaths projected by 2050. Comparing future implementation of a set of stricter policies to a scenario with 2010 policies held constant, smoking prevalence by 2050 could be reduced by another 39% (29%–54%), and 1.3 million (0.9 million–2.0 million) out of 9 million future premature deaths could be averted.

Conclusions:
Brazil provides one of the outstanding public health success stories in reducing deaths due to smoking, and serves as a model for other low and middle income nations. However, a set of stricter policies could further reduce smoking and save many additional lives.

Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary

Vyšlo v časopise: The Brazil SimSmoke Policy Simulation Model: The Effect of Strong Tobacco Control Policies on Smoking Prevalence and Smoking-Attributable Deaths in a Middle Income Nation. PLoS Med 9(11): e32767. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001336
Kategorie: Research Article
prolekare.web.journal.doi_sk: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001336

Souhrn

Zdroje

1. Iglesiasa R, Prabhat J, Pintoc M, Luiza da Costa e Silvad V, Godinhoe J (2007) Health, Nutrition and Population Discussion Paper: tobacco control in Brazil. Washington (District of Columbia): The World Bank.

2. MonteiroC, CavalcanteT, MouraE, ClaroR, SzwarcwaldC (2007) Population-based evidence of a strong decline in the prevalence of smokers in Brazil (1989–2003). Bull World Health Organ 85: 527–534.

3. SzkloAS, de AlmeidaLM, FigueiredoVC, AutranM, MaltaD, et al. (2012) A snapshot of the striking decrease in cigarette smoking prevalence in Brazil between 1989 and 2008. Prev Med 54: 162–167.

4. HuT-H, SungH-Y, KeelerTE (1995) Reducing cigarette consumption in California: Tobacco taxes vs. an anti-smoking media campaign. Am J Public Health 85: 1218–1222.

5. HomerJB, HirschGB (2006) System dynamics modeling for public health: background and opportunities. Am J Public Health 96: 452–458.

6. LevyDT, BauerJE, LeeHR (2006) Simulation modeling and tobacco control: creating more robust public health policies. Am J Public Health 96: 494–498.

7. LevyD, BenjakulS, RossH, RitthiphakdeeB (2008) The role of tobacco control policies in reducing smoking and deaths in a middle income nation: results from the Thailand SimSmoke simulation model. Tob Control 17: 53–59.

8. LevyDT, ChoS, KimY-M, ParkS, SuhM-K, et al. (2010) SimSmoke model evaluation of the effect of tobacco control policies in Korea: the unknown success story. Am J Public Health 100: 1267–1273.

9. LevyD, TworekC, HahnE, DavisR (2008) The Kentucky SimSmoke tobacco policy simulation model: reaching healthy people 2010 goals through policy change. South Med J 101: 503–507.

10. LevyDT, BauerJ, RossH, PowellL (2007) The role of public policies in reducing smoking prevalence and deaths caused by smoking in Arizona: results from the Arizona tobacco policy simulation model. J Public Health Manag Pract 13: 59–67.

11. LevyDT, HylandA, HigbeeC, RemerL, ComptonC (2007) The role of public policies in reducing smoking prevalence in California: results from the California tobacco policy simulation model. Health Policy 82: 153–166.

12. LevyDT, NikolayevN, MumfordEA (2005) Recent trends in smoking and the role of public policies: results from the SimSmoke tobacco control policy simulation model. Addiction 10: 1526–1537.

13. LevyDT, BlackmanK, CurrieLM, MonsU (2012) Germany SimSmoke: the effect of tobacco control policies on future smoking prevalence and smoking-attributable deaths in Germany. Nicotine Tob Res E-pub ahead of print.

14. CurrieLM, BlackmanK, ClancyL, LevyDT (2012) The effect of tobacco control policies on smoking prevalence and smoking-attributable deaths in Ireland using the IrelandSS simulation model. Tob Control E-pub ahead of print.

15. NagelhoutGE, LevyDT, BlackmanK, CurrieL, ClancyL, et al. (2011) The effect of tobacco control policies on smoking prevalence and smoking-attributable deaths. Findings from the Netherlands SimSmoke tobacco control policy simulation model. Addiction 107: 407–416.

16. Levy D, Zaloshjna E, Blackman K, Chaloupka F, Fong GT (2012) The role of tobacco control policies in reducing smoking and deaths caused by smoking in the eighteen nations with the largest smoking burden in tobacco control in low and middle income nations. In: Fong G, Chaloupka F, Yurekli A, editors. Tobacco control policies in low and middle income nations. Rockville: National Cancer Institute.

17. LevyD, BoyleR, AbramsD (2012) Using the Minnesota SimSmoke model to examine the role of past policies on smoking prevalence and smoking attributable deaths in Minnesota. Am J Prev Med In press.

18. LevyD, CurrieL, ClancyL (2012) SimSmokeFinn: how far can tobacco control policies move Finland toward tobacco-free 2040 goals? Scand J Public Health 40: 544–552.

19. LevyD, CurrieL, ClancyL (2012) Tobacco control policy in the United Kingdom: blueprint for the rest of Europe? Eur J Public Health E-pub ahead of print.

20. US Department of Health and Human Services (1990) The health benefits of smoking cessation: a report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta (Georgia): US Department of Health and Human Services.

21. HughesJR, KeelyJ, NaudS (2004) Shape of the relapse curve and long-term abstinence among untreated smokers. Addiction 99: 29–38.

22. Thun MJ, Myers DG, Day-Lally C, Namboodiri NM, Calle EE, et al. (1997) Age and the exposure-response relationships between cigarette smoking and premature death in Cancer Prevention Study II. In: National Cancer Institute, editor. Changes in cigarette related disease risks and their implication for prevention and control. Bethesda (Maryland): National Cancer Institute. pp. 383–475.

23. National Cancer Institute (1997) Changes in cigarette-related disease risks and their implication for prevention and control. Bethesda (Maryland): National Cancer Institute.

24. US Department of Health and Human Services (1989) Reducing the health consequences of smoking: 25 years of progress: a report of the Surgeon General. DHHS Publication No. [CDC] 89-8411. Atlanta (Georgia): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

25. CorreaPC, BarretoSM, PassosVM (2009) Smoking-attributable mortality and years of potential life lost in 16 Brazilian capitals, 2003: a prevalence-based study. BMC Public Health 9: 206.

26. OliveiraA, ValenteJ, LeiteI (2008) The disease burden attributable to smoking in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 2000. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 63: 215–222.

27. SuzukiI, HamadaGS, ZamboniMM, Cordeiro PdeB, WatanabeS, et al. (1994) Risk factors for lung cancer in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: a case-control study. Lung Cancer 11: 179–190.

28. MenezesAM, HortaBL, OliveiraAL, KaufmannRA, DuquiaR, et al. (2002) [Attributed risk to smoking for lung cancer, laryngeal cancer and esophageal cancer.]. Rev Saude Publica 36: 129–134.

29. Burns DM, Lee L, Shen LZ, Gilpin E, Tolley HD, et al. (1997) Cigarette smoking behavior in the United States. In: National Cancer Institute, editor. Changes in cigarette-related disease risks and their implication for prevention and control. Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph 8. Bethesda (Maryland): National Cancer Institute. pp. 13–112.

30. LevyD, GrahamA, MabryP, AbramsD, OrleansCT (2010) Modeling the impact of smoking cessation treatment policies on quit rates. Am J Prev Med 38: S364–S372.

31. World Health Organization (2008) WHO report on the global tobacco epidemic, 2008: the MPOWER package. Geneva: World Health Organization.

32. Instituto Nacional de Câncer/Ministério da Saúde (2010) Brazil global adult tobacco survey report. Rio de Janeiro: Instituto Nacional de Câncer

33. HopkinsDP, BrissPA, RicardCJ, HustenCG, Carande-KulisVG, et al. (2001) Reviews of evidence regarding interventions to reduce tobacco use and exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. Am J Prev Med 20: 16–66.

34. JhaP, ChaloupkaFJ (2000) The economics of global tobacco control. BMJ 321: 358–361.

35. NascimentoBE, OliveiraL, VieiraAS, JoffilyM, GleiserS, et al. (2008) Avoidance of smoking: the impact of warning labels in Brazil. Tob Control 17: 405–409.

36. SzkloAS, CoutinhoES (2010) The influence of smokers' degree of dependence on the effectiveness of message framing for capturing smokers for a quitline. Addict Behav 35: 620–624.

37. Jha P, Chaloupka F, editors(2000) Tobacco control in developing countries. New York: Oxford University Press.

38. AlmeidaC, BravemanP, GoldMR, SzwarcwaldCL, RibeiroJM, et al. (2001) Methodological concerns and recommendations on policy consequences of the World Health Report 2000. Lancet 357: 1692–1697.

39. JhaP, JacobB, GajalakshmiV, GuptaPC, DhingraN, et al. (2008) A nationally representative case-control study of smoking and death in India. N Engl J Med 358: 1137–1147.

40. PerlmanF, BobakM (2008) Socioeconomic and behavioral determinants of mortality in posttransition Russia: a prospective population study. Ann Epidemiol 18: 92–100.

41. JeeSH, LeeJK, KimIS (2006) Smoking-attributable mortality among Korean adults: 1981–2003. Korean J Epidemiol 28: 92–99.

42. KhangYH, LynchJW, Jung-ChoiK, ChoHJ (2008) Explaining age-specific inequalities in mortality from all causes, cardiovascular disease and ischaemic heart disease among South Korean male public servants: relative and absolute perspectives. Heart 94: 75–82.

43. WenC-P, TsaiS-P, ChenC-J, ChengT-Y (2004) The mortality risks of smokers in Taiwan: part I: cause-specific mortality. Prev Med 39: 528–535.

44. LevyDT, GitchellJG, ChaloupkaF (2004) The effects of tobacco control policies on smoking rates: a tobacco control scorecard. J Public Health Manag Pract 10: 338–351.

45. US Department of Health and Human Services (2000) Reducing tobacco use: a report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta (Georgia): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention