Declining smoking in Sweden: is Swedish Match getting the credit for Swedish tobacco control's efforts?
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Adolescent↗
Biomedical subjects
S L Tomar
Publications and source records attributed to S L Tomar.
Quantifying the diffused benefit from water fluoridation in the United States.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the total contribution of water fluoridation to caries reduction by including the benefit from the diffusion of fluoride from fluoridated communities to surrounding nonfluoridated communities via the export of bottled beverages and processed foods. METHODS: We analyzed data from the 1986-87 NIDR Children's Survey for 18,507 school children aged 6-17 years who had at least one permanent tooth and for whom a complete fluoride exposure history could be created. To measure water fluoridation exposure, we generated continuous and categorical exposure variables. Years of fluoridation exposure (YFE-continuous) measured the number of years the child lived at residences receiving fluoridated water. Lifetime fluoridation exposure (LFE-categorical) was high if the child lived at residences receiving fluoridated water more than 50% of his life and low, otherwise. We summed the proportion of state population receiving fluoridated water times the number of years the child had lived in each state and then divided this value by the child's age to measure diffusion exposure (DE). We grouped DE into three levels: low (DE<=0.25), medium (0.25 =0.55). For each level of DE, we compared the age-adjusted mean DMFS for high and low LFE. In addition we used linear regression to measure the association between DMFS and YFE while controlling for DE, age, exposures to other fluoride sources, and sociodemographic variables. Reported results are significant at P<0.05. RESULTS: Comparison of mean DMFS scores found that the direct benefit of water fluoridation (DMFS(LFE=low) - DMFS(LFE=high)) was 1.44 surfaces among low DE children and 0 among high DE children. The diffused benefit (DMFS(LFE=low, DE=low) - DMFS(LFE=low, DE=high)) was 1.23 surfaces. The regression results were similar and indicated that the direct benefit would be 1.44 fewer DMFS for low DE children and the indirect benefit would be 1.09 fewer DMFS for high DE children. CONCLUSION: Failure to account for the diffusion effect may result in an underestimation of the total benefit of water fluoridation, especially in high diffusion exposure regions.
Adolescent↗
An economic evaluation of community water fluoridation.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this research was to assess the local cost savings resulting from community water fluoridation, given current exposure levels to other fluoride sources. METHODS: Adopting a societal perspective and using a discount rate of 4 percent, we compared the annual per person cost of fluoridation with the cost of averted disease and productivity losses. The latter was the product of annual dental caries increment in nonfluoridated communities, fluoridation effectiveness, and the discounted lifetime cost of treating a carious tooth surface. We obtained or imputed all parameters from published studies and national surveys. We conducted one-way and three-way sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: With base-case assumptions, the annual per person cost savings resulting from fluoridation ranged from $15.95 in very small communities to $18.62 in large communities. Fluoridation was still cost saving for communities of any size if we allowed increment, effectiveness, or the discount rate to take on their worst-case values, individually. For simultaneous variation of variables, fluoridation was cost saving for all but very small communities. There, fluoridation was cost saving if the reduction in carious surfaces attributable to one year of fluoridation was at least 0.046. CONCLUSION: On the basis of the most current data available on the effectiveness and cost of fluoridation, caries increment, and the cost and longevity of dental restorations, we find that water fluoridation offers significant cost savings.
Adolescent↗
Dentistry's role in tobacco control.
BACKGROUND: Cigarette smoking remains the nation's leading preventable cause of premature mortality. Tobacco use also is responsible for 75 percent of deaths resulting from oral and pharyngeal cancer, more than one-half of the cases of periodontitis and numerous other oral health effects. METHODS: The author summarized the prevalence of tobacco use in the United States, evaluated recent literature on the status of tobacco control activities in dental schools and dental practice, and reviewed new guidelines on clinical and community-based interventions for tobacco use. RESULTS: Nearly 25 percent of adults and 35 percent of high-school students smoke cigarettes, and many use other forms of tobacco. More than one-half of adult smokers and nearly three-fourths of adolescents see a dentist each year. However, more than 40 percent of dentists do not routinely ask about tobacco use, and 60 percent do not routinely advise tobacco users to quit. Meanwhile, less than one-half of dental schools and dental hygiene programs provide clinical tobacco intervention services. CONCLUSIONS: At least 50 dental organizations have adopted policy statements about tobacco use, but much work needs to be done in translating those policy statements into action. Tobacco use remains prevalent in the United States, and dentistry has not yet maximized its efforts to reduce it. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The recently issued U.S. Public Health Service guidelines on treating tobacco use and dependence provides evidence-based, practical methods for dentists and other primary care providers to incorporate into their practice. Because dentists and dental hygienists can be effective in treating tobacco use and dependence, the identification, documentation and treatment of every tobacco user they see need to become a routine practice in every dental office and clinic.
Adolescent↗
Smoking-attributable periodontitis in the United States: findings from NHANES III. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.
BACKGROUND: The principal objectives of this study were to examine the relationship between cigarette smoking and periodontitis and to estimate the proportion of periodontitis in the United States adult population that is attributable to cigarette smoking. METHODS: Data were derived from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, a nationally representative multipurpose health survey conducted in 1988 to 1994. Participants were interviewed about tobacco use and examined by dentists trained to use standardized clinical criteria. Analysis was limited to dentate persons aged > or =18 years with complete clinical periodontal data and information on tobacco use and important covariates (n = 12,329). Data were weighted to provide U.S. national estimates, and analyses accounted for the complex sample design. We defined periodontitis as the presence of > or =1 site with clinical periodontal attachment level > or =4 mm apical to the cemento-enamel junction and probing depth > or =4 mm. Current cigarette smokers were those who had smoked > or =100 cigarettes over their lifetime and smoked at the time of the interview; former smokers had smoked > or =100 cigarettes but did not currently smoke; and never smokers had not smoked > or =100 cigarettes in their lifetime. RESULTS: We found that 27.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: +/-1.8%) of dentate adults were current smokers and 23.3% (95% CI: +/-1.2%) were former smokers. Overall, 9.2% (95% CI: +/-1.4%) of dentate adults met our case definition for periodontitis, which projects to about 15 million cases of periodontitis among U.S. adults. Modeling with multiple logistic regression revealed that current smokers were about 4 times as likely as persons who had never smoked to have periodontitis (prevalence odds ratio [ORp] = 3.97; 95% CI, 3.20-4.93), after adjusting for age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, and income:poverty ratio. Former smokers were more likely than persons who had never smoked to have periodontitis (ORp = 1.68; 95% CI, 1.31-2.17). Among current smokers, there was a dose-response relationship between cigarettes smoked per day and the odds of periodontitis (P <0.000001), ranging from ORp = 2.79 (95% CI, 1.90-4.10) for < or =9 cigarettes per day to ORp = 5.88 (95% CI, 4.03-8.58) for > or =31 cigarettes per day. Among former smokers, the odds of periodontitis declined with the number of years since quitting, from ORp = 3.22 (95% CI, 2.18-4.76) for 0 to 2 years to ORp = 1.15 (95% CI, 0.83-1.60) for > or =11 years. Applying standard epidemiologic formulas for the attributable fraction for the population, we calculated that 41.9% of periodontitis cases (6.4 million cases) in the U.S. adult population were attributable to current cigarette smoking and 10.9% (1.7 million cases) to former smoking. Among current smokers, 74.8% of their periodontitis was attributable to smoking. CONCLUSIONS: Based on findings from this study and numerous other reports, we conclude that smoking is a major risk factor for periodontitis and may be responsible for more than half of periodontitis cases among adults in the United States. A large proportion of adult periodontitis may be preventable through prevention and cessation of cigarette smoking.
Adolescent↗
Dental and other health care visits among U.S. adults with diabetes.
OBJECTIVE: This study compared yearly dental visits of diabetic adults with those of nondiabetic adults. For adults with diabetes, we compared the frequency of past-year dental visits with past-year visits for diabetes care, dilated eye examinations, and foot examinations. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study using a sample of 105,718 dentate individuals aged > or =25 years, including 4,605 individuals with diabetes who participated in the 1995-1998 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System in 38 states. RESULTS: Dentate adults (i.e., those with at least some natural teeth) with diabetes were less likely than those without diabetes to have seen a dentist within the preceding 12 months (65.8 vs. 73.1%, P = 0.0000). Adults with diabetes were less likely to have seen a dentist than to have seen a health care provider for diabetes care (86.3%); the percentage who saw a dentist was comparable with the percentage who had their feet examined (67.7%) or had a dilated eye examination (62.3%). The disparity in dental visits among racial or ethnic groups and among socioeconomic groups was greater than that for any other type of health care visit for subjects with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Promotion of oral health among diabetic patients may be necessary, particularly in Hispanic and African-American communities. Information on oral health complications should be included in clinical training programs. Oral and diabetes control programs in state health departments should collaborate to promote preventive dental services, and the oral examination should be listed as a component of continuous care in the American Diabetes Association's standards of medical care for diabetic patients.
Adult↗
Surveillance for use of preventive health-care services by older adults, 1995-1997.
PROBLEM/CONDITION: In 1995, a total of 55 million persons aged > or =55 years lived in the United States. The members of this large and growing segment of the population are major consumers of health care. Their access to medical and dental preventive services contributes to their likelihood of healthy later years and influences their long-term impact on the health-care delivery system. REPORTING PERIOD: 1995-1997. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEMS: This report summarizes data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), the state-based Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), and the Medicare Current Beneficiary Study (MCBS) to describe national, regional, and state-specific patterns of access to and use of preventive services among persons aged > or =55 years. RESULTS: During 1995-1997, approximately 90% of persons aged > or =55 years living in the United States reported having a regular source of health-care services. However, only 75%-80% reported receiving a routine checkup during the preceding 2 years. The estimated percentage of persons who reported not being able to receive medical care because of cost was highest for those aged 55-64 years. Within this age group, the percentage was highest among Hispanics (4%) and persons without a high school diploma. Approximately 11% of Medicare beneficiaries reported delaying care be cause of cost or because they had no particular source of care. Percentage estimates varied according to age, race/ethnicity, and sociodemographic status. Approximately 95% of persons aged > or =55 years reported having their blood pressure checked during the preceding 2 years, but only 85%-88% had received a cholesterol evaluation during the preceding 5 years. The percentage of women receiving breast and cervical cancer screening decreased with increasing age, and the percentage of persons aged > or =55 years who had received some form of screening for colorectal cancer was low approximately 25% for fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and 45% for endoscopy. State-specific rates of compliance with vaccination recommendations among persons aged > or =65 years were higher for influenza vaccine (range: 54%-74%) than for pneumococcal vaccine (range: 32%-59%), and compliance increased with advancing age. State-specific estimates of the percentage of annual dental visits varied 40%-75%, and 41%-88% of persons aged > or =65 years reported not having dental insurance. INTERPRETATION: Access to medical services among adults living in the United States is greater for persons aged > or =65 years, compared with those aged <65 years, presumably because of Medicare coverage. In contrast, use of dental services decreased, despite increased need for preventive and restorative dental care. Although Medicare covers many medical services for older adults, financial, personal, and physical barriers to both medical and dental care create racial, regional, and sociodemographic disparities in health status and use of health services in the United States. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION: Continued surveillance of access to and use of health services among older adults (i.e., persons aged > or =65 years), as well as among persons aged 55-64 years, will help health-care providers target underserved groups, make Medicare coverage decisions, and develop public health programs to ensure equitable access to services and improve the health of older adults.
Aged↗
Chewing tobacco use and dental caries among U.S. men.
BACKGROUND: Chewing tobacco has high levels of sugars and may be cariogenic, but few studies have investigated such an association. This study examined the relationship between chewing tobacco use and dental caries among U.S. adult men. METHODS: Participants in the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey conducted from 1988 to 1994 were interviewed about tobacco use and examined by dentists. The authors included in their analysis dentate men 18 years of age or older. They calculated the mean number of decayed or filled permanent teeth, or DFT, and decayed or filled coronal tooth surfaces, or DFS, as well as the mean number and percentage of decayed or filled root surfaces, or RDFS, and decayed root surfaces, or RDS, by tobacco-use status. They used multiple logistic regression to examine the association between chewing tobacco use and root-surface caries. RESULTS: Men who currently used only chewing tobacco had a higher adjusted mean number of DFT than did those who currently used only snuff, only cigarettes or more than one form of tobacco or who never used tobacco. Mean DFS also was higher among chewing tobacco users than among those who used only snuff, only cigarettes or more than one form of tobacco. Chewing tobacco users had a higher mean RDFS and RDS than did the users of other forms of tobacco or nonusers. Current users of chewing tobacco were more than four times as likely as those who never used tobacco to have one or more RDFS or RDS, with a dose-response relationship between number of packages used per week and odds of having root-surface caries. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to its established role as a carcinogen, chewing tobacco may be a risk factor in the development of root-surface caries and, to a lesser extent, coronal caries. This may be due to high sugar content, increased gingival recession and enhanced collagenase activity. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Interventions by dentists and other members of the oral health care team to prevent tobacco use and help users quit can reduce the risk of developing oral and systemic disease.
Adolescent↗
A pilot study of the use of smokeless tobacco.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Humans↗
Oral cancer education training methods: a comparison of self-study and didactic approaches.
BACKGROUND: Dentists' competence and comfort level in detecting oral cancer may be strongly influenced by their dental school training. The purpose of this study was to compare the demonstrated knowledge of oral cancer topics among students receiving lectures and those learning the material through self-instruction at two dental schools. METHODS: Students at School 1 received 17 hours of lectures on various topics in oral cancer, including epidemiology, etiologic factors, histopathology, clinical appearance, clinical management and treatment, and oral complications. Lecture topics reflected material in the assigned text. Students at School 2 received only an introductory lecture, followed by a ten-week self-paced course using the same text used in School 1. At the end of the courses, the students at the two schools received identical 50-item final examinations. RESULTS: The students who had received the lectures and assigned readings scored significantly higher than did those assigned self-instruction alone (mean score of 91.2% vs 81.3%; p < 0.0001). This difference remained after statistical adjustment for entering grade-point average and Dental Aptitude Test score. CONCLUSIONS: Self-study of assigned readings may result in lower levels of knowledge of oral cancer topics than more traditional lecture-based teaching. The impact of this difference on clinical performance has not yet been demonstrated.
Analysis of Variance↗
Adult dental visits in California: successes and challenges.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to estimate and characterize the proportion of California adults who visited a dentist in the preceding year and to identify reasons for not going. METHODS: In 1995, 4,029 adults were interviewed by telephone as part of the California Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Items included recentness of a dental visit, dental insurance status, and number of teeth lost due to disease. Persons who had not seen a dentist within the preceding year were asked the main reason they had not gone. RESULTS: In 1995, 65.9% of adults reported visiting a dentist in the preceding twelve months. Use of dental services was greater among persons aged 35 years or older (70.4%) than among those aged 18-34 years (58.4%) and among those with dental insurance (74.9%) than those without (54.4%). Dental visits were less likely among adults living at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty level, those with less than a high school education, and the edentulous. Reasons most commonly cited for not seeing a dentist were no perceived reason to go (37.2%), cost (30.7%), and fear (9.2%). CONCLUSION: Substantial variation in use of dental services exists among California's adults. Achieving equity in access and opportunity for disease prevention in this state may require expanded dental insurance coverage and serious efforts in oral health promotion.
Adolescent↗
Incidence and predictors of smokeless tobacco use among US youth.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to provide estimates of the cumulative incidence of initiation of smokeless tobacco use in a cohort of young persons and to explore sociodemographic, environmental, behavioral, and personal predictors of experimentation with and regular use of snuff or chewing tobacco. METHODS: The data for this cohort study were derived from the 1989 Teenage Attitudes and Practices Survey and its 1993 follow-up. The study included 7830 young people 11 through 19 years of age at baseline. RESULTS: During the 4 years, 12.7% of participants (20.9% of male participants) first tried smokeless tobacco, and 4.0% (8.0% of male participants) became self-classified regular users. This suggests that, each year, approximately 824000 young people in the United States 11 to 19 years of age experiment with smokeless tobacco and about 304 000 become regular users. Cumulative incidence was highest for male non-Hispanic Whites. Predictors of regular use included age, geographic region, cigarette smoking, participation in organized sports, and perceived friends' approval or indifference. CONCLUSIONS: Public health approaches to preventing use of smokeless tobacco should include development of skills for responding to pressures to use tobacco.
Adolescent↗
Review of the evidence that pH is a determinant of nicotine dosage from oral use of smokeless tobacco.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether manipulation of the pH of moist-snuff products by manufacturers could control the delivery of nicotine. DATA SOURCES: Medline database 1966-97 using the following subject headings and keywords: nicotine, absorption, mouth mucosa, skin, hydrogen-ion concentration, smokeless tobacco, biological transport, and membranes; computer database of the tobacco bibliography maintained by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Office on Smoking and Health; bibliographies of pertinent journal articles, books, and governmental reports; personal communications with experts in nicotine pharmacology and addiction; and Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation documents in the Tobacco Control Archives of the University of California, San Francisco. STUDY SELECTION: Included all relevant animal studies, in-vitro studies, nicotine replacement therapy trials, and human observational studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: We found that the effects of pH on drug absorption have been well established in animal models for nicotine and many other acidic or basic compounds. Increased alkalinity promotes the absorption of nicotine and increases its physiological effects. Human studies, which are more limited, confirm these processes. For example, nicotine absorption is directly related to the pH when nicotine is delivered in either tobacco smoke or nicotine polacrilex gum. CONCLUSIONS: Although other factors could influence the rate of nicotine absorption from oral tobacco, manipulating tobacco pH appears to be the primary means by which the speed of nicotine absorption is determined in moist-snuff products.
Administration, Oral↗
Oral mucosal smokeless tobacco lesions among adolescents in the United States.
The presence of oral smokeless tobacco lesions among adolescents may be an early indicator of increased risk for oral cancers. Data from the 1986-1987 National Survey of Oral Health in US School Children were used to examine the cross-sectional relationship between the use of tobacco and alcohol and the presence of white or whitish oral soft-tissue lesions. The sample included 17,027 schoolchildren (aged 12 to 17 years) who provided information on the use of snuff, chewing tobacco, cigarettes, and alcohol and who received oral clinical examinations. Smokeless tobacco lesions were detected in 1.5% of students (projects to about 300,000 nationally), including 2.9% of males and 0.1% of females. These lesions were more prevalent among whites (2.0%) than among African-Americans (0.2%) or Hispanics (0.8%). Modeling with multivariate logistic regression revealed that, among white males, current snuff use was the strongest correlate of lesions [odds ratio (OR) = 18.4; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 8.5-39.8], followed by current chewing tobacco use [OR = 2.5; 95% CI = 1.3-5.0]. Lesions were strongly associated with duration, monthly frequency, and daily minutes of use of snuff and chewing tobacco. These data suggest that snuff may be a stronger risk factor than chewing tobacco for smokeless tobacco lesions, but the use of either of these forms of oral tobacco exhibits a dose-response relationship with the occurrence of lesions. We found little evidence that the use of alcohol or cigarettes may increase the risk of smokeless tobacco lesions. Preventing smokeless tobacco lesions and their possible malignant transformation may be best accomplished among adolescents by preventing the use of snuff and chewing tobacco.
Adolescent↗
Smokeless tobacco: an addicting drug.
In 1986, the Surgeon General concluded that smokeless tobacco is an addictive drug sharing many qualities with other drugs of abuse such as morphine and cocaine. Smokeless tobacco can be used to deliver psycho-active and dependence-producing levels of nicotine. Tolerance develops with repeated use, causing the user to increase nicotine dosing through increased use and/or switching to products with higher nicotine yields. Clinical signs of nicotine withdrawal develop upon cessation of use. Recent data show that smokeless tobacco products vary widely in their nicotine dosing capabilities. Low-dose products tend to be those commonly marketed toward, and used by, young people without previous smokeless tobacco experience. Many of these people develop dependence and switch to high-dose products. The present article discusses each of these qualities of smokeless tobacco in greater detail. The article also discusses qualities of smokeless tobacco that make it an effective nicotine delivery device that leads to addiction.
Behavior, Addictive↗
State smoking prevalence estimates: a comparison of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and current population surveys.
OBJECTIVES: This study examined whether there are systematic differences between the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) and the Current Population Survey (CPS) for state cigarette smoking prevalence estimates. METHODS: BRFSS telephone survey estimates were compared with estimates from the US Census CPS tobacco-use supplements (the CPS sample frame includes persons in households without telephones). Weighted overall and sex- and race-specific BRFSS and CPS state estimates of adults smoking were analyzed for 1985, 1989, and 1992/1993. RESULTS: Overall estimates of smoking prevalence from the BRFSS were slightly lower than estimates from CPS (median difference: -2.0 percentage points in 1985, -0.7 in 1989, and -1.9 in 1992/1993; P < .05 for all comparisons), but there was variation among states. Differences between BRFSS and CPS estimates were larger among men than among women and larger among Blacks than among Hispanics or Whites; for most states, these differences were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: The BRFSS generally provides state estimates of smoking prevalence similar to those obtained from CPS, and these are appropriate for ongoing state surveillance of smoking prevalence.
Adult↗
The peril of smokeless tobacco.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Humans↗
Do dentists and physicians advise tobacco users to quit?
To examine dentists' and physicians' effectiveness in advising patients who use tobacco to quit, the authors estimated the percentages of smokers in the United States who visited a dentist or physician in the preceding year, the percentages of those who were advised by their health care provider to quit and the percentages of those who planned to quit smoking. They also estimated the percentage of smokeless tobacco users who were ever advised by their dentist or physician to quit. The results of the study indicate that dentists and physicians may not be maximizing their opportunities to advise their patients who use tobacco to quit, or they are not adequately communicating to their patients the importance of quitting.
Adolescent↗