Hookah smoking the past and future of tobacco
Download
1 / 84

Hookah Smoking: - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 608 Views
  • Updated On :

Hookah Smoking: The Past and Future of Tobacco? Brian Primack, MD, EdM, MS Assistant Professor of Medicine and Pediatrics May 2008 Terminology Hookah Waterpipe Shisha-Pipe Narghile Bong Hubble-bubble www.hookah-bars.com Hours Sunday – Thursday: 4 PM – 12:30 AM

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Hookah Smoking:' - adamdaniel


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Hookah smoking the past and future of tobacco l.jpg

Hookah Smoking:The Past and Future of Tobacco?

Brian Primack, MD, EdM, MS

Assistant Professor of Medicine and Pediatrics

May 2008


Terminology l.jpg
Terminology

  • Hookah

  • Waterpipe

  • Shisha-Pipe

  • Narghile

  • Bong

  • Hubble-bubble



Hours l.jpg
Hours

  • Sunday – Thursday: 4 PM – 12:30 AM

  • Friday – Saturday: 4 PM – 2 AM


Flavors l.jpg

Fruit

Apple

Banana

Cherry

Melon

Candy

Bubble gum

Chocolate mint

Alcohol

Margarita

Piña colada

Flavors


Slide17 l.jpg

Good Quality

Regular $7.00Large $10.00

Arabic Coffee, Apple, Apple Alex, Double Apple, Apricot, Banana, Candy, Cappuccino, Cherry, Carmel, Coconut, Cola, Grape, Jasmine, Lemon, Mint, Mango, Mandarin, Mixed Fruit, Orange, Pistachio, Peach Rose, Salloum, Strawberry, Vanilla, Zaghoul Light, Zaghoul, Licorice


Slide18 l.jpg

Excellent QualityRegular $8.00Large $11.00

Double apple, Apricot, Banana, Cantaloupe, Cappuccino, Cherry, Coconut, Mint, Melon, Orange, Peach, Pineapple, Rose, Raspberry, Strawberry, Tutti-Frutti, Vanilla

Cognac, Margarita, Pina Colada, Strawberry

Daiquiri


Slide19 l.jpg

Premiume Quality Regular $8.50Large $11.50

Apple, Special Apple, Bahrany Apple, Apple Eskandarani, Banana, Cola, Cappuccino, Fruit Cocktail, Honey Melon, Mango, Orange, Peach, Pipe, Rose, Strawberry


Slide20 l.jpg

Superior Quality Regular $9Large $12

Apple, Strawberry, Grape, Rose


Slide21 l.jpg

* Make your Hookah Cool with adding ice for $1

* Mix & Match Flavors Add $2

* Flavor Your Hookah Water Add $3

* Add 0.25 Per Each Person** Minimum 1 Order Per Person **

** Bring your own bottle $2 cork charge **

You Must Be 21 to bring your own alcohol bottle


Also have l.jpg
Also Have

  • Fruit Smoothies (e.g. Strawberry, Banana, Mango, Guava)

  • Ice Cream

  • Coffee and Tea

  • Milk Shakes

  • Desserts

  • Games (Mancala, Dominoes)




200 it rotates l.jpg
$200(It rotates!)






Smoke exposure l.jpg
Smoke Exposure

  • 30-60 minute sessions

  • Each session ~100 inhalations

  • Each inhalation ~500 mL in volume

  • Total volume

    • Waterpipe session: 50,000 mL

    • Cigarette: 500-600 mL


Smoking topography l.jpg
Smoking Topography

1Shihadeh 2003; Shihadeh 2004

2Breland 2005; Djordjevic 2000


Known harm l.jpg
Known Harm

  • Waterpipe smoke contains ...

    • Carcinogens

    • Carbon monoxide

    • Nicotine

  • Waterpipe smoking associated with ...

    • Cancer

    • Cardiovascular disease

    • Decreased pulmonary function

    • Nicotine dependence


Waterpipe cigarettes l.jpg
Waterpipe > Cigarettes

  • Tar

  • Nicotine

  • CO

  • Heavy Metals

Shihadeh 2003; Shihadeh 2004; Djordjevic 2000; Hoffman, 2000


Growing u s prevalence l.jpg
Growing U.S. Prevalence

  • 200-300 new waterpipe cafés opened in the U.S. between 1999 and 2004

  • Particularly in college towns

  • Convenience sample surveys suggest high current use (past 30 days)

    • 411 first-year college students: 15.3%

    • 744 introductory psychology students: 20%


Holes in literature l.jpg
Holes in Literature

  • Random sample

  • Associations between waterpipe smoking and

    • Demographics

    • Beliefs (e.g., harm, addiction, popularity)

  • Populations outside college



Purpose l.jpg
Purpose

  • Determine the 30-day, annual, and lifetime prevalence of waterpipe smoking in a random sample of college students

  • Determine associations between outcome variables and sociodemographic and predictors


Design l.jpg
Design

  • Cross-sectional survey

  • Random sample of students at the University of Pittsburgh

  • Collect data via web-based version of the American College Health Association’s (ACHA) National College Health Assessment (NCHA)

  • Added items related to waterpipe use


Approvals l.jpg
Approvals

  • University of Pittsburgh Institutional Review Board

  • University Vice Provost


Procedure l.jpg
Procedure

  • April 2007 during a three-week period

  • Avoided the 30-day period following Spring Break

  • Email invitation sent to 3600 randomly selected Pitt students

  • Incentive: lottery to win cash prizes ranging from $25 to $100

  • Three reminder e-mails sent to students during the three-week period


Demographic measures l.jpg
Demographic Measures

  • Age

  • Gender

  • Race

  • Residence (on-vs. off-campus)

  • Undergraduate vs. graduate

  • Membership in a fraternity or sorority

  • Self-reported academic achievement


Theory of reasoned action l.jpg
Theory of Reasoned Action

Norms

Intent

Behavior

Attitudes


Behavior measures l.jpg
Behavior Measures

  • Have you ever smoked tobacco from a waterpipe (hookah, shisha, narghile), even one or two puffs? (Yes/No)

  • During the past year, have you smoked tobacco from a waterpipe (hookah, shisha, narghile), even one or two puffs? (Yes/No)

  • During the past 30 days, have you smoked tobacco from a waterpipe (hookah, shisha, narghile), even one or two puffs? (Yes/No)


Attitudes l.jpg
Attitudes

  • “Would you say that smoking from a waterpipe (hookah, shisha, narghile) is more harmful or less harmful than smoking regular cigarettes?” (“waterpipe more harmful” / “waterpipe same harm” / “waterpipe less harmful”)

  • “Would you say that smoking from a waterpipe (hookah, shisha, narghile) is more addictive or less addictive than smoking regular cigarettes?” (“waterpipe more addictive” / “waterpipe same addictiveness” / “waterpipe less addictive”)


Normative beliefs l.jpg
Normative Beliefs

  • “Among your peers, how socially acceptable is it to smoke tobacco from a waterpipe (hookah, shisha, narghile)?” (“not acceptable” / “somewhat/moderately acceptable” / “very acceptable”)

  • “What percentage of college students do you think has ever smoked tobacco from a waterpipe (hookah, shisha, narghile)?” (0-100%, collapsed into tertiles


Analysis l.jpg
Analysis

  • Multivariate logistic regression models

    • Dependent variables

      • 30-day waterpipe smoking

      • One year waterpipe smoking

    • Independent variables

      • Perception of harm

      • Perception of addictiveness

      • Acceptability

      • Popularity

    • Covariates

  • Sensitivity analyses with stepwise regression


Response rate l.jpg
Response Rate

  • 61 emails undeliverable

  • Response rate 660/3539 = 18.6%

  • 647/660 (98.0%) had outcome data

  • Compared with non-respondents, respondents were:

    • Younger (20.9 vs. 21.4, p<0.001)

    • Female (65.6% vs. 50.5%, p<0.001)

    • Caucasian (85.4% vs. 80.7%, p=0.004)







Other factors associated with 1 year wpts l.jpg
Other Factors Associated with1-Year WPTS

  • Younger age

  • Off campus

  • Fraternity membership


Major findings l.jpg
Major Findings

  • Lifetime use >40%, similar to cigarette lifetime use

  • Current use 9.5%

  • One year use 30.5%

  • Associated with lack of concern for addictiveness (and harm, less so)

  • Associated with sense of acceptability and popularity


Cigarettes vs waterpipe l.jpg
Cigarettes vs. Waterpipe

  • Many waterpipe smokers had never smoked cigarettes

  • In non-cigarette smokers

    • Problematic

    • Introducing nicotine to previously naïve population

  • In cigarette smokers

    • Substitution?

    • Augmentation?


Rate differences l.jpg
Rate Differences

  • 30-day rate (9.5%) much lower than annual (30.6%) and ever (40.5%) rates

  • Sampling period: we avoided Spring Break, fraternity rush, etc.


Limitations l.jpg
Limitations

  • Response rate: 18.6%

  • Demographic differences between respondents and non-respondents

  • May have inflated our results since younger population more likely to smoke waterpipe

  • Cross-sectional design


Conclusion l.jpg
Conclusion

  • First random sample

  • Ever use common in this sample

  • Further research

    • Longitudinal designs

    • National samples (NCHA)

  • Educational/interventional efforts

    • Major educational gaps

    • Worthwhile to start now

    • Focus on addictiveness, acceptability, popularity



Purpose66 l.jpg
Purpose

  • Determine prevalence in statewide sample of high school students

  • Determine associations with waterpipe use in high school


No high school national data l.jpg
No High School National Data

  • Monitoring the Future

  • Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance Survey

  • Others


Arizona 2005 l.jpg
Arizona 2005

  • Youth tobacco survey

  • Added 2 items dealing with waterpipe tobacco smoking

    • Ever

    • Past 30 days


Participants l.jpg
Participants

  • Statewide representative sample

  • Grades 6-12

  • All students enrolled in public and/or charter schools


Procedure70 l.jpg
Procedure

  • Schools chose to use active or passive consent forms (89% used passive)

  • Spring semester 2005

  • 45 minute class period


Measures l.jpg
Measures

  • Tobacco

    • 30-day waterpipe smoking

    • Ever waterpipe smoking

    • Other tobacco smoking

  • Sociodemographic data

    • Age

    • Gender

    • Race

    • Type of school (charter vs. regular)

    • Plan to attend college


Analysis72 l.jpg
Analysis

  • Sociodemographic trends

  • Multivariate analyses




Major findings78 l.jpg
Major Findings

  • History of waterpipe tobacco smoking

    • 6% of all 6th-12th graders

    • 15% of 12th graders

  • More common than 5 other methods of tobacco smoking

  • Associated with age, gender, race, SES


Slide79 l.jpg
Age

  • High school: older

  • College: younger

  • Surrogate for alcohol use?


Experimentation vs addiction l.jpg
Experimentation vs. Addiction

  • May lead to increased uptake of various types of nicotine

  • Gateway to cigarette smoking?


Surveillance l.jpg
Surveillance

  • National studies (MTF, YRBS) should track this form of tobacco use

  • Likely to increase

    • Less harsh

    • Flavored

    • Educational gaps

    • Policy issues


Anything national l.jpg
Anything National?

  • ACHA including 2 items in NCHA in 2009

  • Random sample of 7619 college students



Conclusion84 l.jpg
Conclusion

  • Waterpipe tobacco smoking represents a major potential threat to public health

  • Threatens to undermine successes from cigarette smoking

  • Surveillance and further research are necessary


ad