Salud Pública de México (Jun 2012)

Impacto de las advertencias con pictogramas en las cajetillas de cigarrillos en México: resultados de una encuesta en fumadores de Guadalajara Impact of cigarette package health warnings with pictures in Mexico: results from a survey of smokers in Guadalajara

  • James F Thrasher,
  • Rosaura Pérez-Hernández,
  • Edna Arillo-Santillán,
  • Inti Barrientos-Gutiérrez

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 54, no. 3
pp. 254 – 263

Abstract

Read online

OBJETIVO: Mostrar el efecto de las primeras advertencias sanitarias (AS) con pictogramas en México. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Encuesta transversal en una muestra representativa de 1 765 adultos fumadores de Guadalajara, México (2010). Se estimaron modelos logísticos para determinar la asociación entre el reconocimiento de las AS con pictogramas y las variables que indican el impacto de las mismas. RESULTADOS: 58% de la población indicó haber comprado una cajetilla con AS con pictogramas. Estos fumadores expuestos reportaron pensar con mayor frecuencia en los daños que causa fumar (34 contra 25% p=0.003) y pensar en dejar de fumar (23 contra 14% p=0.001). Se observó una mayor aceptación de las AS como medio para comunicar información importante al fumador (93 contra 87% pOBJETIVE: Evaluate the impact of the first pictorial health warning labels (HWLs) on cigarette packs in Mexico. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of a representative sample of 1 765 adult smokers from Guadalajara, Mexico, 2010. Logistic regression models were estimated to determine the association between recall of having purchased a pack with a pictorial HWL and psychosocial variables indicating their impact. RESULTS: 58% reported having purchased a pack with one of the pictorial HWLs, and these were considered the exposed population. Exposed smokers reported a greater frequency of thinking about smoking-related risks (34 vs. 25% p=0.003), and thinking about quitting smoking (23 vs. 14% p=0.001). Exposure to pictorial HWLs was also associated with a greater acceptability of HWLs as a means of communicating with smokers (93 vs. 87% p<0.001), as was the perception that the government communicates well about tobacco-related health risks (68 vs. 55% p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Pictorial HWLs have made smokers think more about these risks and about quitting smoking. This policy should continue to be exploited as a cost-effective educational intervention.

Keywords