No Smoke Left Behind- Knowledge, Attitudes and Usage of Smokeless Tobacco from the Lens of the Public: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study from Pakistan

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4724727/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

No Smoke Left Behind- Knowledge, Attitudes and Usage of Smokeless Tobacco from the Lens of the Public: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study from Pakistan

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4724727/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Background

Smokeless tobacco (SLT) encompasses products that are not burnt but instead consumed orally or nasally. One-third of tobacco is consumed in the smokeless form in South Asia. Despite its widespread usage, there has been limited empirical research on the prevalence of and factors influencing SLT consumption in Pakistan. This study aimed to provide an assessment of SLT knowledge, attitudes, and usage in Pakistan.

Methods

Using an online questionnaire, a cross-sectional survey was conducted across Pakistan. Convenience sampling was used to disseminate, and expert approval was sought followed by a pilot study to validate the questionnaire. A comprehensive questionnaire was developed using elements from the Global Adult Tobacco Survey and other tools which had previously been utilized within Pakistan. Participants' responses were described using descriptive statistics, and SPSS version 26 was used to perform linear and logistic regression. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Data was collected from 1,195 participants among which 85.86% of participants had heard of SLTs prior to the survey. Sex, province, household income and previous doctor visits were significant determinants to product knowledge through which 72.55% agreed that these products can lead to serious illnesses but 30% noted a lack of knowledge on legality. General attitudes agreed to a belief that it makes one unwell (44.1%), sense of guilt (43.85%) and more research is needed on it (54.39%). Negative health effects were the biggest deterrent from pursuing these products for 60.33% of participants. Among significant factors influencing the use of SLTs, the greatest odds of use were found with use as an alternative to cigarettes (OR 4.45) and secondly, due to its availability in a liked flavor (OR 2.27). About 31% reported to have used the product once, with 69.82% of current users expressing a desire to quit.

Conclusions

Although adequate knowledge and aligning attitudes exist for SLTs, light is shed in the face of a sustaining public health problem. We offer important insights that can guide the creation of focused interventions meant to lower SLT use, and the health hazards associated with it in the Pakistani community by highlighting important myths, incentives, and deterrents.

chewed tobacco

public health

snus

non-cigarette

Knowledge regarding SLTs remains high in Pakistan, although many perceived their use as a legal gray area and agreed that more research is needed to gauge their health effects.
There exists significant social stigma around their use, with many respondents associating a sense of guilt and unwellness with their use.
Significant factors for usage include usage as a cigarette alternative and the variety of available flavors, both of which are selling points leveraged in marketing these products.
Most current users report an intent to quit.

From a vast range of methods used across the globe, tobacco use can be summarized into the two major categories of smoked and smokeless tobacco products (SLT) (1). SLTs encompass those products that are not burnt but instead consumed orally or nasally (2). These include Moist snuff (held between the cheek and gum; available in various forms such as Khaini, Snus, Shammaah, Nass, or Naswar), dry snuff (powdered tobacco traditionally inhaled through the nose or taken orally) and chewing tobacco (placed in the mouth and either sucked or chewed (1). Varieties of smokeless tobacco include Plug, Loose-leaf, Chimo, Toombak, Gutkha, Twist and Pan-masala or Betel-quid, which comprises tobacco, areca nuts, slaked lime, sweeteners, and flavorings wrapped in a betel leaf) (1).

Despite not being combusted, SLTs contain harmful substances including at least 28 cancer causing chemicals (carcinogens) that can lead to numerous health issues(3, 4). These products pose significant risks to oral health, including gum disease, tooth decay, and oral cancer, stemming from prolonged exposure to carcinogens and irritants(3). Furthermore, smokeless tobacco increases the risk of various cancers beyond the oral cavity, such as esophageal and pancreatic cancer, while also fostering nicotine addiction, complicating cessation efforts. Cardiovascular consequences, including elevated heart rate and blood pressure, contribute to the potential for cardiovascular disease, while reproductive health may also suffer, with implications for fertility and pregnancy outcomes(3, 5).

The prevalence of SLTs is influenced by a variety of demographic factors, including socioeconomic status, ethnic background, gender, and age (3, 5). These products are most used in South Asian countries, where one-third of tobacco is consumed in the smokeless form. Increased use of smokeless tobacco products is highly neglected as international governments are more focused on eliminating cigarettes and not tobacco entirely, which is contrary to the article 1 (d) & 1(f) of WHO's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control(6).

Furthermore, there is no regulation throughout the manufacturing and sales of SLTs in low- and middle-income countries like Pakistan. This leads to and supports purchase of SLTs, while misconceptions of it being less hazardous or even having medical benefits prevail(7, 8).

From a public health point of view, the use of SLTs poses a massive challenge globally. Contrary to popular belief that smokeless tobacco provides an avenue for current cigarette smokers to quit, it was found that the initial use of SLTs instead paved the way for many adolescents to move on to cigarette smoking(9). The use of SLTs is generally considered socially acceptable and there is a lack of knowledge regarding its detrimental effects on health. In fact, it has been observed that the misconception about the favorable effect of chewing SLTs is common, primarily among the younger age groups(10, 11).

In Pakistan, SLT is predominantly consumed in various forms such as Naswar (tobacco mixed with cardamom and menthol) and Paan or Betel-quid(2). Despite its widespread usage, there has been limited empirical research on the prevalence and factors influencing smokeless tobacco consumption in Pakistan(2). Studies examining the correlation between the use of smokeless tobacco and other substances like areca nut, and their association with head, neck, and oral cancers, have been conducted in specific regions of Pakistan, often with small sample sizes (12–18).

This study aimed to provide a comprehensive examination of smokeless tobacco consumption in Pakistan, offering insights into its knowledge, attitudes, motivations, deterrents, and usage patterns among the general public.

The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement's reporting guidelines are adhered to in this cross-sectional study(19).

Study Design, Setting and Population

This cross-sectional study was approved by the Aga Khan University Hospital's (AKUH) Ethical Review Committee (ERC) and was carried out throughout Pakistan using an online questionnaire. This questionnaire was intended for the public which are defined as adults living in Pakistan who are at least eighteen years old in the inclusion criteria.

Data Collection Tool

In the absence of a prior questionnaire suitable for our population, a comprehensive questionnaire was developed using elements from the Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATs) and other tools which have previously been utilized within Pakistan (20–23).

The English questionnaire was also translated to Urdu, which is the national language of Pakistan, by an independent translator fluent in both languages and with experience in questionnaire translation.

To ensure face validity, the English and Urdu versions of the questionnaire underwent pilot testing among 50 respondents. A 7-item knowledge, 27- item attitude and 5 item usage questionnaire were used for pilot testing. Cronbach’s alpha value was calculated for each of these domains to check for internal consistency, with the calculated values being 0.8597, 0.9503 and 0.86 for the knowledge, attitudes, and usage domains respectively. These scores reflected good, excellent, and good consistency respectively.

The final components of the questionnaire were then rigorously reviewed in close association with faculty experts in tobacco research at the Section of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at AKUH. Content validity was assessed by calculating a content validity index (CVI) for this survey for relevance, essentiality and clarity based on the ratings of two subject experts. A CVI of 0.942, 0.942 and 0.8986 was calculated for these three parameters respectively, which was deemed acceptable according to Davis (1992) (24).

The final survey contained four sections which were demographics, knowledge, attitudes, and usage. The survey began with a consent form explaining the nature and scope of the survey and then the sections were asked from the respondents.

Sample Size Calculation and Sampling Technique

The sample size was calculated using OpenEpi(25). According to the Pakistan Demographic and Health Survey 2017-18, the current smoking prevalence among men ages 15–49 is 31.8%(26). Using that statistic, at least 334 participants aged 18 years and above were determined to be recruited. An additional 10% margin of error was taken for a minimum required sample size of 367.

For this study, convenience sampling was used to reach adults across the country. The online questionnaire was shared on social media platforms and circulated from person to person.

Sampling Technique and Data Collection Procedure

Responses were collected by means of a questionnaire that was available in both English and Urdu, the national language of Pakistan. Our questionnaire was circulated among adults (age ≥ 18) as a Google Form, on closed social media platforms, such as WhatsApp groups and Facebook groups.

As the data was collected, it was compiled into a Google Sheet. This Google Sheet was password protected and accessible only to members of the research team. Upon completion of data collection, the Google Sheet was downloaded as an Excel sheet, which was password protected. The Google Sheet and individual questionnaire responses were available to the research team for 3 months after data collection was complete, after which they were erased.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analyses were run using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 26. Continuous data such as age were reported using mean and standard deviation. Categorical data consisting of the results of the Likert scales and multiple-choice questions has been reported as frequencies (gross numbers) and percentages (n; %). To analyze the effect of factors such as age, sex, and level of education on the overall knowledge score, a linear regression was performed. In addition, a logistic regression analysis was undertaken to determine significant motivating and deterring factors. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered significant for all analyses.

Demographics

We collected data from a total of 1,195 participants. The median age of the participants stood at 23 years, and there was a fair distribution of gender, with 41.75% identifying as male and 58.24% as female. Geographically, the majority hailed from Sindh (42.09%) and Punjab (32.30%), while other provinces were represented to a lesser degree as displayed in Figure 1. Ethnically, the largest contingent identified as Urdu speaking (29.29%), followed by Punjabi (22.51%), and Pashtun (17.49%). Educational levels varied, with 62.59% holding bachelor's degrees and 26.11% possessing postgraduate degrees. Most of the respondents were unmarried (79.83%), while monthly income majorly ranged from PKR 100,000 to 500,000 (43.26%) and PKR 50,000 to 100,000 (26.69%). Additionally, the majority reported visiting a healthcare provider 1-2 times in the past 12 months (50.63%). These data have been summarized in Table 1.

Knowledge Towards SLTs

Most participants (85.86%) demonstrated prior awareness of smokeless tobacco before the survey. When questioned about the contents of smokeless tobacco, 51.38% believed it contained both tobacco and nicotine, 20.92% believed it contained only nicotine, and 16.49% believed it contained only tobacco. Approximately 5% of participants held the view that neither substance was present. In terms of perceptions of harm, 54.23% believed that smokeless tobacco is equally harmful as traditional cigarettes, while 25.27% considered it less harmful, and 17.82% deemed it more harmful. A minor percentage (2.68%) perceived it to be not harmful at all. Notably, 43.68% believed these products were not prohibited by law, and 30.29% were uncertain about their legal status as displayed in Figure 2.

Concerning health risks, 72.55% concurred that these products can lead to serious illnesses such as cancer and stroke. In addition, a majority disagreed with the notion that occasional use of these products is non-addictive or harmless, with 30.63% expressing strong disagreement. Meanwhile, 22.85% believed these products assist in quitting cigarettes, and 27.53% adopted a neutral stance on the matter. Finally, a substantial proportion, 63.26%, strongly disagreed that these products are safe during pregnancy, and 62.59% strongly disagreed that they are safe for individuals with underlying medical conditions such as heart disease, blood pressure, and diabetes as displayed in Figure 3.

On linear regression analysis (Table 2) to determine significant factors affecting knowledge, females had greater odds to higher knowledge scores, respondents from Punjab had 33% lower odds of higher knowledge compared to respondents from Sindh. Higher monthly household income (1.8 times greater odds of the 100,000-500,000 group) and doctor visits (greater than 1) both were associated with greater odds of higher knowledge scores.

Attitudes towards SLTs

Concerning attitudes toward smokeless tobacco, a significant majority either disagreed or strongly disagreed that it makes one happy (65.78%) and feel young (69.62%). Conversely, participants agreed or strongly agreed that the use of these products could lead to feeling unwell or sick (44.10%) and evoke a sense of shame or guilt (43.85%). Interestingly, the majority also expressed disagreement or strong disagreement with the notion that these products are exclusive to adults (44.77%) and that the health effects are genetic and don't happen to everyone (67.03%). Additionally, a substantial number of participants (54.39%) believed that further research on these products is required. These data are summarized in Figure 4.

We investigated the influence of various motivators on prompting individuals to consider or adopt smokeless tobacco products as shown in Figure 5. Notably, the most substantial impact was attributed to the perception that these products aid in stress reduction, with 25.36% of participants acknowledging a significant impact. Furthermore, the pleasurable experience offered by these products had a significant impact on 22.68% of respondents, and the ease of acquisition played a significant impact on 23.60%. Motivations such as favorite flavors (46.95%) and the absence of offensive odors or pleasant smells (45.78%) were influential. Social factors were also relevant, as having friends or family members using these products (20.33%) and the perception of appearing "cool" (17.57%) held a significant impact. Positive media portrayals (19.08%) and the perception of these products as an alternative to cigarettes (20.17%) were additional contributors to motivation.

An evaluation of various deterrents discouraging individuals from embracing smokeless tobacco products revealed notable impacts. Foremost among these deterrents was the concern about the negative health effects of the product, as reported by 60.33% of participants. Similarly, the social unacceptability or stigma associated with these products had a significant impact on 45.57% of respondents. 33.14% respondents claimed that cost factor played a significant role in deterring them from using these products. Factors such as negative taste and smell (48.20%), environmental pollution (41.76%), and the potential spread of secondhand smoke to family and friends (46.11%) emerged as demotivators. Additionally, a significant percentage expressed that the fear of addiction (56.07%) and opposition from family members and friends (51.05%) had a significant impact in not pursuing them. These data have been displayed in Figure 6.

Usage of SLTs

In terms of usage, a total of 30.54% of respondents acknowledged having used smokeless tobacco products at least once, while the majority (69.46%) had not. Among past users of SLTs, 20.92% used it daily, while the majority used it less than daily (47.96%). In comparison, 31.95% of current users used SLTs daily while 35.50% used it less than daily. Concerning intentions to quit, 69.82% of current users expressed a desire to quit, while 30.18% indicated no plans to quit. These data have been summarized in Table 3.

On logistic regression (Table 4) to determine significant factors influencing the use of SLTs, the greatest odds of use were found with use as an alternative to cigarettes (OR 4.45) and secondly, due to its availability in a liked flavor (OR 2.27). Respondents who felt SLTs made them look cool had lesser odds of using them at least once (OR 0.58). No significant deterrents were found to influence SLT use.

Our study finds that the majority of the participants had heard of SLTs prior to the study and had a fair degree of knowledge regarding the product content and health effects, with negative health impact being a significant deterrent to use. It is to be noted that the laws pertaining to SLTs were debated among respondents and attitudes leaned towards the negative side. Motivating factors included as an alternative to cigarettes, outlook of the drug on perceived popularity and widespread availability in flavors. The utilization of SLTs presents an escalating public health issue, with approximately 360 million individuals worldwide engaging in its consumption, predominantly concentrated in the South Asian region where over 90% of users reside(27). Despite its well-understood association with various disease states, the prevalence of SLTs is steadily increasing within South Asian nations (28–30).

More than half the participants answered the composition of SLTs correctly, while at the same time a surprising 21% believed it contained only nicotine and 16.5% thought SLTs had tobacco only. The common forms of smokeless tobacco in Pakistan include Naswar, Chalia, Pan (betel with tobacco), and Gutka(31). All of these compositions contain tobacco with varying degrees of nicotine based on regional preferences. A survey on rural Bangladeshi adolescents revealed that 32.5% of the participants did not know SLTs contain nicotine, and according to the Bangladesh Global Adult Tobacco Survey 2015, 58% of the non-users implicated that SLTs contain nicotine(32, 33). Although lack of prior study examining the public's knowledge of SLTs ingredients in Pakistan, hindered direct comparison, our findings are comparable to the available data.

Concerning health risks, 72.55% of our respondents concurred that these products can lead to serious illnesses such as cancer and stroke. One study from Karachi, Pakistan, revealed that 44% males and 37% females thought it is bad for health. 54% of our survey participants believed that SLTs are equally harmful, and 25% believed they are less harmful compared to traditional cigarettes(34). This statistic is in accordance with a previous study conducted in Poland, which demonstrated that 72% of their respondents perceived SLTs to be as harmful and 25% to be less harmful than cigarettes (35). Another survey from Bangladesh revealed that only one-quarter of their participants thought SLTs were less harmful than smoked tobacco(32). The perceived severity of SLTs compared to traditional smoked cigarettes is low among our participants, thereby contributing to a higher likelihood of individuals choosing to use smokeless tobacco (36).

Emotional associations with smokeless tobacco were also explored in detail in our study. Participants' rejection of the notion that SLT use evokes a sense of feeling happy or young likely reflects an increasing awareness of the health risks associated with smokeless tobacco consumption (37, 38). This shift in perception underscores societal attitudes, indicating a growing understanding of its adverse effects on health and well-being. Respondents associated a sense of guilt and unwellness with smokeless tobacco use likely stems from societal efforts to promote tobacco cessation, and it may contribute to individuals feeling morally conflicted and physically unwell when using smokeless tobacco products.

The majority of our respondents disagreed that smokeless tobacco products are exclusively for adults. In recent years, a shift from smoked tobacco products to SLTs is seen among the younger population in Western countries (39). A survey noted that more than 300 kids ages 12–17 started using smokeless tobacco for the first time in the US(40). The drift towards smokeless tobacco in the South Asian younger population is also in the process. A recent study from India revealed that the majority of students initiating SLTs were in the 10–11 years age group, and 11% of the students enrolled in classes 9–11 were consuming SLTs (41). The availability and accessibility of smokeless tobacco products, coupled with limited regulatory measures, contribute to their widespread use among younger populations (42).

Exploring the factors in encouraging the use of SLTs in our participants, we found that the perception of SLTs as a stress reliever, pleasurable experience after the use of these products, and ease of acquisition played a crucial role. A grounded theory study conducted in Iran, similarly, revealed that along with the addictive nature of SLTs, relaxation and euphoria were some of the prominent continuation factors(43).

Ease of acquisition and unregulated distribution play a pivotal role in the widespread prevalence of these products in the South Asian region(44, 45). Naswar, a common form of SLT is widely available in 20g packing costing 10 Pakistani rupees (US$0.04), which can be consumed several times a day (46, 47). Social influences from friends and family members who use smokeless tobacco products can normalize and promote their usage among the population, particularly among young individuals who may be influenced by peer behavior(48). Positive media representations of SLTs and their portrayal as an alternative to cigarettes can shape public perception, influencing individuals to perceive these products as attractive and potentially safer alternatives.

Pertinent factors in discouraging the use of SLTs in our respondents included negative health effects. Previous studies have demonstrated that the harmful health impacts of SLTs serve as the main deterrent(49). The stigma attached to SLTs and the fear of addiction act as significant deterrents among our participants. The stigma stems from societal perceptions of these products as unappealing or undesirable, leading to fear of being judged, hence avoiding their use altogether. The fear of addiction underscores apprehensions about the long-term consequences of tobacco use, further discouraging its uptake.

A minority of respondents reported having used SLTs before, although higher than previous reports of 19–21% prevalence(50). This is likely attributable to our sample having a greater degree of education and being primarily from the young adult age group. Previous studies have found associations with SLT use and age, with highest prevalence in the 30–39 age group and lowest in those with the highest level of education(51). Future studies should be translated into regional languages of Sindhi, Pashto, Balochi and Seraiki and venture into rural areas of Pakistan and places where our web-based survey was unable to reach.

Of particular note in the patterns of use was that daily usage of SLTs had decreased from past to current users, signifying decreased initiative in procuring the product. A reason for this could be the warning given in tobacco packaging(52). This impact can further be enhanced by ensuring the inclusion of all STP kinds in the law and further increasing the degree of warning provided on packaging, a challenge the government continues to face(53). This serves to show that interventions, if conducted in a proper manner have the potential to give results.

Strengths

This study is first of its kind in this region to inquire on knowledge, attitudes and usage of SLTs in Pakistan and has the potential to pave the way for future research along with facilitating the development of policy. This study includes a new web based comprehensive questionnaire which was developed using elements from the Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATs) and considerate reviewing was done to increase reliability of the questionnaire. An adequate sample size of 1195 participants were used, which increased the power of the statistical test.

Limitations

The uneven representation throughout provinces is a crucial finding that highlights the need for more study to fully understand the various regional variations in the use of smokeless tobacco. Moreover, most of the study's sample comprises persons with greater educational attainment, potentially skewing the findings and limiting their generalizability to the broader population. Additionally, as one of the pioneering investigations into SLT use in Pakistan with a substantial sample size, the study lacks comparative data from similar studies, hindering the ability to contextualize its findings. Our study focuses on younger university students who have a greater awareness of health risks and are more impacted by social stigma. This limits our ability to identify accurate deterrents for smokeless tobacco (SLT) use within this group and highlights the need for further research on factors influencing SLT use in a broader population.

Study Recommendations

SLTs have been in the tobacco market for a long-time making interventions to reduce use a public health priority. Public interventions should aim to reduce accessibility to the product while continuing to promote public awareness campaigns on the health risks of chewing tobacco. By making SLTs less inexpensive, greater taxes can discourage use. In order to restrict advertising and accessibility, it is also crucial to enforce strict marketing laws. In addition, with the emergence of branded forms of SLTs, monitoring of marketing is important to prevent early age exposure. Equally important is packaging, which can reduce attraction and warn consumers of potential hazards by requiring plain packaging with health warnings. Campaigns directed by the government should encourage cessation support, and marketing efforts should be evidence-based and highlight health risks.

In summary, our research contributes to a better understanding of SLTs in Pakistan. Our findings underscore the urgent need for targeted public health interventions to address misconceptions, deter use, and promote cessation efforts in the face of an escalating public health issue. SLTs have been within public use in the form of chewable tobacco for a long time, however the emergence of newer varieties requires policy intervention to regulate usage. By identifying key misconceptions, motivations, and deterrents, we provide valuable insights that can inform the development of targeted interventions aimed at reducing smokeless tobacco use and its associated health risks in the Pakistani population.

Smokeless tobacco (SLT)

Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE)

Aga Khan University Hospital's (AKUH)

Ethical Review Committee (ERC)

Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATs)

Content validity index (CVI)

Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS)

Interquartile range (IQR)

Pakistani Rupees (PKR)

Odds Ratio (OR)

Aga Khan University (AKU)

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Our study obtained ethical clearance from the Ethical Review Committee (ERC) at the Aga Khan University (ID: 2023-8608-24823). The form initially obtained informed consent, detailing the scope of the study, the right of the participant to withdraw from the study at any time and the maintenance of confidentiality of the participants. If the participant agreed to take part in the study, they were able to fill the rest of the questionnaire. To maintain the privacy of the participants, identifiers such as name were not asked. In addition, to maintain anonymity, the questionnaire did not record respondents’ names. There were no risks, immediate benefits, or incentives for participation in the survey.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Availability of data and materials

Additional data is available on reasonable request from the corresponding author. Please note that all data has been provided in the manuscript.

Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Funding

None.

Authors’ contributions

HAI, NI and JAK conceptualized the study and devising the methodology. US, WAS, AS and SR were instrumental in the data collection and recruitment of participants by disseminating the questionnaire, while HAI, HJ, and SARM were the major contributors in analyzing and interpreting data. HAI, US, MS and WAS contributed to the initial draft while HAI, HJ and SARM were major contributors in editing the manuscript. HAI, HJ, and SARM critically reviewed the results and suggested changes. All authors approved of the final manuscript.

Acknowledgments

The authors express their gratitude to the Aga Khan University (AKU) Section of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, specifically to Dr. Talha Shahzad for his assistance in creating the study instrument and Ms. Rubeena Irfan for her administrative support. We would also like to thank Muhammad Ali Akbar Khan (AKU) and Taha Shaikh (AKU) for reviewing the final manuscript.

WHO - types of tobacco use [Internet]. [cited 2024 Apr 15]. Available from: https://www.afro.who.int/sites/default/files/2017-09/Chapter%201.%20Types%20of%20tobacco%20use_1.pdf
WHO EMRO | Smokeless tobacco consumption in a multi-ethnic community in Pakistan: a cross-sectional study | Volume 20, issue 6 | EMHJ volume 20, 2014 [Internet]. [cited 2024 Apr 5]. Available from: https://www.emro.who.int/emhj-vol-20-2014/volume-20-6/smokeless-tobacco-consumption-in-a-multi-ethnic-community-in-pakistan-a-cross-sectional-study.html
Health Effects of Smokeless Tobacco Products | American Lung Association [Internet]. [cited 2024 Apr 6]. Available from: https://www.lung.org/quit-smoking/smoking-facts/health-effects/smokeless-tobacco
Boffetta P, Hecht S, Gray N, Gupta P, Straif K. Smokeless tobacco and cancer. Lancet Oncol [Internet]. 2008 [cited 2024 Apr 6];9(7):667–75. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18598931/
Gupta PC, Ray CS. Smokeless tobacco and health in India and South Asia. Respirology. 2003 Dec;8(4):419–31.
WHO FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON TOBACCO CONTROL. [cited 2024 Apr 6]; Available from: www.who.int/fctc
Adedigba MA, Aransiola J, Arobieke RI, Adewole O, Oyelami T. Between Traditions and Health: Beliefs and Perceptions of Health Effects of Smokeless Tobacco Among Selected Users in Nigeria. Subst Use Misuse. 2018 Mar 21;53(4):565–73.
Messina J, Freeman C, Rees A, Goyder E, Hoy A, Ellis S, et al. A systematic review of contextual factors relating to smokeless tobacco use among South Asian users in England. Nicotine Tob Res [Internet]. 2013 May [cited 2024 Apr 6];15(5):875–82. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23089485/
Tomar SL. Is use of smokeless tobacco a risk factor for cigarette smoking? The U.S. experience. Nicotine Tob Res. 2003 Aug;5(4):561–9.
Khawaja MR, Mazahir S, Majeed A, Malik F, Merchant KA, Maqsood M, et al. Chewing of betel, areca and tobacco: perceptions and knowledge regarding their role in head and neck cancers in an urban squatter settlement in Pakistan. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2006;7(1):95–100.
Ali NS, Khuwaja AK, Ali T, Hameed R. Smokeless tobacco use among adult patients who visited family practice clinics in Karachi, Pakistan. J Oral Pathol Med. 2009 May;38(5):416–21.
Cancer in north west Pakistan and Afghan refugees - PubMed [Internet]. [cited 2024 Apr 14]. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9145643/
Rehman SH, Majid B, Syed SA, Qureshi MA. Quantitative Analyses of Skin Cancer Research in Pakistan. Pak J Med Sci [Internet]. 2021 Mar 1 [cited 2024 Apr 14];37(2):582–7. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33679954
Tariq A, Majeed I, Khurshid A. Types of cancers prevailing in Pakistan and their management evaluation. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention. 2015;16(9):3605–16.
Khan SM, Gillani J, Nasreen S, Zai S. Pediatric tumors in North West Pakistan and Afghan refugees. Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 1997;14(3):267–72.
Ernster VL. Advertising and promotion of smokeless tobacco products. NCI Monographs. 1989;(8):87–94.
Arain SS, Kazi TG, Afridi HI, Brahman KD, Naeemullah, Khan S, et al. Preconcentration and determination of lead and cadmium levels in blood samples of adolescent workers consuming smokeless tobacco products in Pakistan. Environ Monit Assess. 2015 May 1;187(5).
Prevalence and predictors of smokeless tobacco use among high-school males in Karachi, Pakistan - PubMed [Internet]. [cited 2024 Apr 14]. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17955775/
STROBE - Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology [Internet]. [cited 2024 Mar 20]. Available from: https://www.strobe-statement.org/
WHO [Internet]. [cited 2024 Jan 7]. Noncommunicable Disease Surveillance, Monitoring and Reporting. Available from: https://www.who.int/teams/noncommunicable-diseases/surveillance/data
Martins RS, Junaid MU, Khan MS, Aziz N, Fazal ZZ, Umoodi M, et al. Factors motivating smoking cessation: a cross-sectional study in a lower-middle-income country. BMC Public Health. 2021 Dec 18;21(1):1419.
Irfan M, Riaz N, Sirang Z, Haque A, Khan J, Shaikh S. Why do women use tobacco? A cross sectional survey from a developing country. European Respiratory Journal [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2024 Jan 7]; Available from: https://erj.ersjournals.com/content/42/Suppl_57/3058
Ali NS, Khuwaja AK, Ali T, Hameed R. Smokeless tobacco use among adult patients who visited family practice clinics in Karachi, Pakistan. Journal of Oral Pathology & Medicine. 2009 May 13;38(5):416–21.
Davis LL. Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research. 1992 Nov;5(4):194–7.
OpenEpi Menu [Internet]. [cited 2024 Jan 7]. Available from: https://www.openepi.com/Menu/OE_Menu.htm
The DHS Program - Pakistan: DHS, 2017-18 - Final Report (English) [Internet]. [cited 2024 Jan 7]. Available from: https://dhsprogram.com/publications/publication-fr354-dhs-final-reports.cfm
The Tobacco Atlas [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2024 May 21]. The Global Impact of Smokeless Tobacco. Available from: https://tobaccoatlas.org/challenges/smokeless/
Khawaja MR, Mazahir S, Majeed A, Malik F, Merchant KA, Maqsood M, et al. Chewing of betel, areca and tobacco: perceptions and knowledge regarding their role in head and neck cancers in an urban squatter settlement in Pakistan. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2006;7(1):95–100.
WHO [Internet]. 2008 [cited 2024 May 21]. WHO report on the global tobacco epidemic, 2008: the MPOWER package. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241596282
Chugh A, Arora M, Jain N, Vidyasagaran A, Readshaw A, Sheikh A, et al. The global impact of tobacco control policies on smokeless tobacco use: a systematic review. Lancet Glob Health. 2023 Jun;11(6):e953–68.
Bile KM, Shaikh JA, Afridi HUR, Khan Y. Smokeless tobacco use in Pakistan and its association with oropharyngeal cancer. East Mediterr Health J. 2010;16 Suppl:S24-30.
Ullah MZ, Lim JN, Ha MA, Rahman MM. Smokeless tobacco use: pattern of use, knowledge and perceptions among rural Bangladeshi adolescents. PeerJ. 2018 Aug 21;6:e5463.
Naznin E, George J, Driezen P, Palazzi K, Wynne O, Nargis N, et al. Trend over time on knowledge of the health effects of cigarette smoking and smokeless tobacco use in Bangladesh: Findings from the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Bangladesh Surveys. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2023 Nov;42(7):1838–49.
Iqbal N, Sheikh MDA, Riaz SU, Irfan M, Awan S, Khan MW, et al. Differences in gender perception of smokeless tobacco. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2022 Aug 1;26(8):795–7.
Jankowski M, Wrześniewska-Wal I, Ostrowska A, Lusawa A, Wierzba W, Pinkas J. Perception of Harmfulness of Various Tobacco Products and E-Cigarettes in Poland: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Survey. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Aug 20;18(16).
Islam FMA, Walton A. Tobacco Smoking and Use of Smokeless Tobacco and Their Association with Psychological Distress and Other Factors in a Rural District in Bangladesh: A Cross-Sectional Study. J Environ Public Health. 2019 Dec 6;2019:1–11.
Kankaria A, Sahoo SS, Verma M. Awareness regarding the adverse effect of tobacco among adults in India: findings from secondary data analysis of Global Adult Tobacco Survey. BMJ Open. 2021 Jun 28;11(6):e044209.
Hettiarachchi P, Jayasooriya P, Amarasinghe H, Siriwardena B, Wijerathne D, Kithalawa arachchi S, et al. Knowledge and Attitudes of Nursing Students Towards Smokeless Tobacco and Areca Nut Control in Central Province of Sri Lanka. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Care. 2020 Aug 15;5(3):133–8.
CDC [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2024 May 21]. Tobacco Product Use and Associated Factors Among Middle and High School Students — National Youth Tobacco Survey, United States, 2021. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/ss/ss7105a1.htm
SAMHSA [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2024 May 21]. SAMHSA Announces National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) Results Detailing Mental Illness and Substance Use Levels in 2021. Available from: https://www.samhsa.gov/newsroom/press-announcements/20230104/samhsa-announces-nsduh-results-detailing-mental-illness-substance-use-levels-2021
Sharma A, Garg S, Singh MM, Deshmukh C, Mishra A, Singh V, et al. Pattern of Smokeless Tobacco Initiation and Use among School Going Adolescents in Delhi, India: A Mixed Method Study. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention. 2023 Sep 1;24(9):3187–93.
Shakya S, Shrestha I, Pradhan PMS. Understanding the Situation and Effectiveness of Adolescent Focused Tobacco Control Policies in Nepal : A Qualitative Study. J Nepal Health Res Counc. 2021 Dec 14;19(3):563–7.
Fattahi E, Solhi M, Hashemi Nazari SS, Barati H, Mehrabian F, Manzari ZS, et al. A model to explain smokeless tobacco consumption in adults: A grounded theory study. Heliyon [Internet]. 2023 Oct 1 [cited 2024 Jun 24];9(10). Available from: /pmc/articles/PMC10589854/
Imam SZ, Nawaz H, Sepah YJ, Pabaney AH, Ilyas M, Ghaffar S. Use of smokeless tobacco among groups of Pakistani medical students – a cross sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2007 Dec 3;7(1):231.
Ahmad F, Khan Z, Siddiqi K, Khan MN, Kibria Z, Forberger S, et al. Awareness, perceptions of and compliance with tobacco control policies among naswar vendors in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pakistan. Tob Control. 2022 Dec;31(e2):e111–7.
Ahmad F, Boeckmann M, Khan Z, Zeeb H, Khan MN, Ullah S, et al. Implementing smokeless tobacco control policy in Pakistan: a qualitative study among Naswar supply chain actors. Tob Control. 2021 Sep;30(5):548–52.
Khan Z, Dreger S, Shah SMH, Pohlabeln H, Khan S, Ullah Z, et al. Oral cancer via the bargain bin: The risk of oral cancer associated with a smokeless tobacco product (Naswar). PLoS One. 2017 Jul 10;12(7):e0180445.
Shahjahan Md, Harun MdGD, Chowdhury ABMA, Ahmed K, Khan HTA. Factors Influencing the Initiation of Smokeless Tobacco Consumption Among Low Socioeconomic Community in Bangladesh: A Qualitative Investigation. Int Q Community Health Educ. 2017 Jul 10;37(3–4):181–7.
Ullah MZ, Lim JN, Ha MA, Rahman MM. Smokeless tobacco use: pattern of use, knowledge and perceptions among rural Bangladeshi adolescents. PeerJ. 2018 Aug 21;6:e5463.
Niaz K, Maqbool F, Khan F, Bahadar H, Ismail Hassan F, Abdollahi M. Smokeless tobacco (paan and gutkha) consumption, prevalence, and contribution to oral cancer. Epidemiol Health. 2017;39:e2017009.
Abbas SM, Alam AY, Usman M, Siddiqi K. Smokeless tobacco consumption in a multi-ethnic community in Pakistan: a cross-sectional study. East Mediterr Health J. 2014 Jun 18;20(6):385–90.
Abdullah SM, Huque R, Siddiqi K, Kanaan M, Huque S, Ullah S, et al. Non-compliant packaging and illicit smokeless tobacco in Bangladesh, India and Pakistan: findings of a pack analysis. Tob Control [Internet]. 2024 May 1;33(3):333. Available from: http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/33/3/333.abstract
Yaqub F. Pakistan Government faces legal challenge over images on tobacco packaging. Lancet Respir Med. 2015 Sep;3(9):673.

Table 1: Demographics Characteristics

IQR: Interquartile range; N=1195

*IQR has been reported as (Q1 – Q3)

Variable

n (%)/Median (IQR)*

Age (Years)

23 (5)

Sex

Male

Female

499 (41.75)

696 (58.24)

Province of residence

Sindh

Punjab

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Balochistan

Islamabad Capital Territory

Azad Jammu and Kashmir

Gilgit Baltistan

503 (42.09)

386 (32.30)

176 (14.73)

52 (4.35)

48 (4.02)

25 (2.09)

5 (0.42)

City of residence

Karachi

Lahore

Peshawar

Bahawalpur

Islamabad

Quetta

Rawalpindi

Hyderabad

Multan

Gujrat

Tando Allahyar

Faisalabad

Rahim Yar Khan

Gujranwala

Muzaffarabad

Ghotki

Abbottabad

Charsadda

Narowal

Dera Ismail Khan

Mirpur Khas

Other

434 (36.32)

130 (10.88)

128 (10.71)

65 (5.44)

57 (4.77)

51 (4.27)

46 (3.85)

33 (2.76)

23 (1.92)

18 (1.51)

13 (1.09)

11 (0.92)

10 (0.84)

9 (0.75)

8 (0.67)

7 (0.59)

5 (0.42)

119 (9.96)

Ethnicity

Punjabi

Urdu-speaking

Sindhi

Pashtun

Baloch

Mixed

Other

269 (22.51)

350 (29.29)

156 (13.05)

209 (17.49)

19 (1.59)

52 (4.35)

140 (11.72)

Level of Education

<5 years (Primary school)

5-10 years (Matric/ O Level)

10-12 years (Intermediate/ A Level)

12-14 years (Bachelor’s degree)

>14 years (Postgraduate degree)

2 (0.17)

9 (0.75)

124 (10.38)

748 (62.59)

312 (26.11)

Marital Status

Unmarried

Married

954 (79.83)

241 (20.17)

Monthly Family Income (PKR)

< 25,000

25,000-50,000

50,000-100,000

100,000-500,000

> 500,000

69 (5.77)

118 (9.87)

319 (26.69)

517 (43.26)

172 (14.39)

How many times did you visit a doctor or health care provider in the past 12 months?

1 or 2

3 to 5

6 or more

272 (22.76)

605 (50.63)

218 (18.24)

100 (8.37)

PKR (Pakistani Rupees); IQR (Interquartile range)

Table 2: Linear Regression to Determine Factors affecting Knowledge regarding SLTs

Variable

Odds Ratio

P-Value

Age (years)

1.00

0.295

Sex

Female

Male

1 (reference)

0.73

0.004*

Level of Education

No formal education

<5 years (Primary school)

5-10 years (Matric/ O level)

10-12 years (Intermediate/ A level)

12-14 years (bachelor’s degree)

>14 years (Postgraduate degree)

1 (reference)

5.52

24.12

25.37

17.82

17.74

0.607

0.174

0.115

0.137

0.146

Marital Status

Unmarried

Married

Divorced

Widowed

1 (reference)

0.92

2.91

2.34

0.557

0677

0.533

Province of Residence

Sindh

AJK

Balochistan

Gilgit Baltistan

Islamabad Capital Territory

KPK

Punjab

1 (reference)

0.91

0.79

2.64

0.84

1.02

0.67

0.806

0.363

0.233

0.534

0.888

0.001*

Monthly Household Income (PKR)

<25,000

25,000-50,000

50,000-100,000

100,000-500,000

>500,000

1 (reference)

0.76

1.09

1.80

1.45

0.736

0.207

0.007*

0.159

Number of Doctor Visits in Past 12 Months

1 or 2

3 to 5

6 or more

1 (reference)

0.97

1.24

0.93

0.03*

0.797

0.094

Table 3: Usage of SLTs

N=1195

Variable

n (%)

Have you ever used any type of SLTs, even once?

Yes

365 (30.54)

830 (69.46)

Used SLTs at least once or currently using (N= 365)

Type of SLT or Similar Product Used (More than one may apply per respondent)

Chewing tobacco, such as loose leaf, plug, twist roll

VELO/Oral Nicotine Pouches

Snuff/Naswar

Lozenges

Orbs

Sticks

Strips

Other

43 (11.78)

88 (24.11)

20 (5.48)

13 (3.56)

6 (1.64)

7 (1.92)

14 (3.84)

Past Users of SLTs (N= 196)

How often did you use smokeless tobacco products in the past?

Daily

Less than daily

Don't know

41 (20.92)

94 (47.96)

61 (31.12)

Active Users of SLTs (N= 169)

How much do you currently spend on it per week? (PKR)

< 1000

1000 - 2000

2000 - 3000

> 3000

Don’t know

45 (26.63)

25 (14.79)

10 (5.91)

19 (11.24)

70 (41.42)

How often do you use smokeless tobacco products currently?

Daily

Less than daily

Don't know

54 (31.95)

60 (35.50)

55 (32.54)

Do you plan on quitting?

Yes

118 (69.82)

51 (30.18)

Abbreviations used: PKR (Pakistani Rupees), SLT (Smokeless Tobacco)

Table 4: Logistic Regression to Determine Factors Influencing the Use of SLTs At Least Once *Adjusted for Age, Gender, Province, Ethnicity, Marital Status, Level of Education and Monthly Family Income
Variable	Odds Ratio	P -Value
Motivators
Easy to acquire	0.68	0.181
Enjoyable experience	1.10	0.746
Gets rid of stress	0.92	0.800
Comes in flavors I like	2.27	0.008*
No offensive odor	1.33	0.317
A friend/family member uses	0.93	0.803
It makes one look cool	0.58	0.032*
Positively portrayed in media	0.77	0.326
Alternative to cigarettes	4.45	<0.001*
Cheaper than others	1.04	0.891
Deterrents
Negative health effects	0.93	0.816
Not socially acceptable	0.64	0.103
Expensive	0.88	0.601
Bad taste/smell	0.71	0.182
Environmental pollution	0.94	0.821
Second hand spread to family	0.82	0.485
Do not want to get addicted	1.18	0.576
Negative portrayal in media	0.82	0.478
Difficult to acquire	0.85	0.534
Opposed by family and friends	1.04	0.888

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

No Smoke Left Behind- Knowledge, Attitudes and Usage of Smokeless Tobacco from the Lens of the Public: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study from Pakistan

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Figures

Contributions to the Literature

Background

Methods

Study Design, Setting and Population

Data Collection Tool

Sample Size Calculation and Sampling Technique

Sampling Technique and Data Collection Procedure

Statistical Analysis

Results

Discussion

Strengths

Limitations

Study Recommendations

Conclusions

Abbreviations

Declarations

References

Tables

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1