Why the study?
The study aimed to describe sociodemographic and health variable indices related to current and former tobacco use among older adults in Indonesia.
A high prevalence of current tobacco use (33.3%) persists among older adults in Indonesia, particularly among men, highlighting the need for targeted cessation programs in this vulnerable population.
Supports targeted tobacco control in older Indonesian men; leaves open causal inference for cardiovascular outcomes.
Purpose: The study aims to describe sociodemographic and health variable indices related to current and former tobacco use among older adults who participated in the Indonesia Family Life Survey (IFLS-5) in 2014-15. Materials and Methods: A national population-based cross-sectional study was conducted with a probability sample of 8,001 aged 50 years or older Indonesians. Results: The overall prevalence of current tobacco use was 33.3% (62.2% in men and 6.5% in women) and former tobacco use was 9.8% (17.4% among men and 2.8% in women), of which 64.4% quit tobacco use when 50 years and older. In multinomial regression analysis, sociodemographic factors (being male, lower education, lower economic status, living in Java and rural residence) and health variables (cancer or malignant tumour, depression symptoms, functional disability and inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption) were associated with current tobacco use. In addition, being overweight or obese, having had a stroke, and other lung conditions were inversely associated with current tobacco use. Further, in adjusted analysis, sociodemographic factors (being 70 years and older, being male, living in Sumatra) and having chronic conditions (dyslipidemia, heart problems, asthma, stomach or digestive diseases and functional disability) were associated with former tobacco use. Conclusions: A high rate of current tobacco use and low rate of former tobacco use was found, particularly among men. The identified risk factors may help to better target this vulnerable population with tobacco cessation programmes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pengpid et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: