4.7 Article

Hookah Use Among US High School Seniors

Journal

PEDIATRICS
Volume 134, Issue 2, Pages 227-234

Publisher

AMER ACAD PEDIATRICS
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2014-0538

Keywords

hookah; adolescents; tobacco; socioeconomic status

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health [R01 DA-01411]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVES: Prevalence of hookah use is increasing significantly among adolescents. This study aimed to delineate demographic and socioeconomic correlates of hookah use among high school seniors in the United States. We hypothesized that more impoverished adolescents and those who smoked cigarettes would be more likely to use hookahs. METHODS: Data were examined for 5540 high school seniors in Monitoring the Future (years 2010-2012), an annual nationally representative survey of high school students in the United States. Using data weights provided by Monitoring the Future, we used multivariable binary logistic regression to delineate correlates of hookah use in the last 12 months. RESULTS: Eighteen percent of students reported hookah use in the past year. Compared with white students, black students were at lower odds for use (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.27, P < .0001). High parent education increased the odds for use (AOR = 1.58, P < .001), and student weekly income from a job of >$50/week (AOR = 1.26, P < .05) or $11 to $50 per week from other sources (AOR = 1.35, P < .01) also increased odds for use. Males and urban students were also at higher odds for use, as were users of alcohol, marijuana, and other illicit substances. Former cigarette smokers were at higher risk, and current smokers were at highest risk for use. CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents of higher socioeconomic status appear to be at particularly high risk for hookah use in the United States. Prevention efforts must target this group as prevalence continues to increase.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available