4.5 Article

Mortality attributable to passive smoking in Spain, 2002

Journal

TOBACCO CONTROL
Volume 16, Issue 6, Pages 373-377

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/tc.2006.019679

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) is associated with a variety of health effects, including lung cancer and ischaemic heart disease. The objective of this study was to estimate the number of deaths caused by exposure to ETS among non-smokers in Spain during the year 2002. Methods: Prevalence of ETS exposure among never smokers was gathered from three region based health interview surveys. The relative risks of lung cancer and ichaemic heart diseases were selected from three meta-analyses. Population attributable risk (PAR) was computed using a range of prevalences (minimummaximum). The number of deaths attributable to ETS was calculated by applying PARs to mortality not attributable to active smoking in 2002. The analyses were stratified by sex, age and source of exposure (home, workplace and both combined). In addition, a sensitivity analysis was performed for different scenarios. Results: Among men, deaths attributable to ETS ranged from 408 to 1703. From 247 to 1434 of these deaths would be caused by the exposure only at home, 136-196 by exposure only in the workplace and 25-73 by exposure at both home and the workplace. Among women, the number of attributable deaths ranged from 820 to 1534. Between 807 and 1477 of these deaths would be caused by exposure only at home, 9-32 by exposure only in the workplace and 4-25 by exposure both at home and in the workplace. Conclusion: Exposure to ETS at home and at work in Spain could be responsible for 1228-3237 of deaths from lung cancer and ischaemic heart disease. These data confirm that passive smoking is an important public health problem in Spain that needs urgent attention.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available