Cargando…

Graphic health warnings and their best position on waterpipes: A cross-sectional survey of expert and public opinion

INTRODUCTION: Our aim was to assess the visibility and efficiency of graphic health warnings (GHWs) on waterpipe tobacco packs (WTPs) and to explore other more effective places to display them for better impact. We also evaluated the visibility of GHWs when placed on the waterpipe device. METHODS: W...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mostafa, Aya, Mohammed, Heba Tallah
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: European Publishing on behalf of the European Network for Smoking and Tobacco Prevention (ENSP) 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7232823/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32432191
http://dx.doi.org/10.18332/tpc/70873
_version_ 1783535459743301632
author Mostafa, Aya
Mohammed, Heba Tallah
author_facet Mostafa, Aya
Mohammed, Heba Tallah
author_sort Mostafa, Aya
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Our aim was to assess the visibility and efficiency of graphic health warnings (GHWs) on waterpipe tobacco packs (WTPs) and to explore other more effective places to display them for better impact. We also evaluated the visibility of GHWs when placed on the waterpipe device. METHODS: We conducted 3 cross-sectional study phases using face-to-face survey questionnaires in 2014-2015. Phase I surveyed 31 tobacco control experts, while Phase II surveyed 700 participants and Phase III surveyed 348 from the public in Cairo, Egypt. RESULTS: Approximately half of the experts and participants in Phases II and III thought that GHWs on WTPs are not adequately visible, and 68.9% and 79.6% in Phases II and III, respectively, suggested posting warnings also in other places. About one-third of experts and 69.1% of Phase II participants suggested posting GHWs inside cafés or in public places, while 46.9% of Phase III participants favored placing them on waterpipes. After viewing our suggested positions on a waterpipe, all experts, 80.6% of participants in Phase II, and 81.6% in Phase III acknowledged that GHWs would be more visible there. The mouthpiece was the location selected most often across all phases (31.1% in Phase I, 35.6% in Phase II and 36.3% in Phase III). Lung and throat cancers were similarly effective in raising participants’ concern about waterpipe smoking health risks (24.7%). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first population-based study to explore the best location to place GHWs on waterpipes. Policymakers should consider enacting a regulatory framework for placing GHWs on waterpipe devices.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7232823
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher European Publishing on behalf of the European Network for Smoking and Tobacco Prevention (ENSP)
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72328232020-05-19 Graphic health warnings and their best position on waterpipes: A cross-sectional survey of expert and public opinion Mostafa, Aya Mohammed, Heba Tallah Tob Prev Cessat Research Paper INTRODUCTION: Our aim was to assess the visibility and efficiency of graphic health warnings (GHWs) on waterpipe tobacco packs (WTPs) and to explore other more effective places to display them for better impact. We also evaluated the visibility of GHWs when placed on the waterpipe device. METHODS: We conducted 3 cross-sectional study phases using face-to-face survey questionnaires in 2014-2015. Phase I surveyed 31 tobacco control experts, while Phase II surveyed 700 participants and Phase III surveyed 348 from the public in Cairo, Egypt. RESULTS: Approximately half of the experts and participants in Phases II and III thought that GHWs on WTPs are not adequately visible, and 68.9% and 79.6% in Phases II and III, respectively, suggested posting warnings also in other places. About one-third of experts and 69.1% of Phase II participants suggested posting GHWs inside cafés or in public places, while 46.9% of Phase III participants favored placing them on waterpipes. After viewing our suggested positions on a waterpipe, all experts, 80.6% of participants in Phase II, and 81.6% in Phase III acknowledged that GHWs would be more visible there. The mouthpiece was the location selected most often across all phases (31.1% in Phase I, 35.6% in Phase II and 36.3% in Phase III). Lung and throat cancers were similarly effective in raising participants’ concern about waterpipe smoking health risks (24.7%). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first population-based study to explore the best location to place GHWs on waterpipes. Policymakers should consider enacting a regulatory framework for placing GHWs on waterpipe devices. European Publishing on behalf of the European Network for Smoking and Tobacco Prevention (ENSP) 2017-06-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7232823/ /pubmed/32432191 http://dx.doi.org/10.18332/tpc/70873 Text en © 2017 Mostafa A http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
spellingShingle Research Paper
Mostafa, Aya
Mohammed, Heba Tallah
Graphic health warnings and their best position on waterpipes: A cross-sectional survey of expert and public opinion
title Graphic health warnings and their best position on waterpipes: A cross-sectional survey of expert and public opinion
title_full Graphic health warnings and their best position on waterpipes: A cross-sectional survey of expert and public opinion
title_fullStr Graphic health warnings and their best position on waterpipes: A cross-sectional survey of expert and public opinion
title_full_unstemmed Graphic health warnings and their best position on waterpipes: A cross-sectional survey of expert and public opinion
title_short Graphic health warnings and their best position on waterpipes: A cross-sectional survey of expert and public opinion
title_sort graphic health warnings and their best position on waterpipes: a cross-sectional survey of expert and public opinion
topic Research Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7232823/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32432191
http://dx.doi.org/10.18332/tpc/70873
work_keys_str_mv AT mostafaaya graphichealthwarningsandtheirbestpositiononwaterpipesacrosssectionalsurveyofexpertandpublicopinion
AT mohammedhebatallah graphichealthwarningsandtheirbestpositiononwaterpipesacrosssectionalsurveyofexpertandpublicopinion