Alcohol and tobacco consumption: What is the role of economic security?. (28th January 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bentley, Rebecca; Baker, Emma; Martino, Erika; Li, Yuxi; Mason, Kate
• Is Part Of: Addiction. Volume 116:Number 7(2021)
• Page Start: 1882
• Page End: 1891
• Publication Date: 2021-01-28
• Subjects: alcohol -- employment -- housing -- longitudinal -- security -- tobacco; Alcoholism -- Periodicals; Drug addiction -- Periodicals; 616.86
• DOI: 10.1111/add.15400
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0965-2140

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Aims: To better understand the longstanding inequalities concerning alcohol and tobacco use, we aimed to quantify the effect of household economic security on alcohol and tobacco consumption and expenditure. Design: Longitudinal analysis using data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia survey (2001–2018). Setting: Australia Participants: A nationally representative cohort of 24 134 adults aged 25–64 years (187 378 observations). Measurements: Tobacco and alcohol use (Yes/No), frequency of use of each per week, household expenditure on each per week, household weekly income (Consumer Price Index [CPI]‐adjusted), employment security (based on conditions of employment) and housing affordability (housing costs relative to household income). Findings: At baseline, one‐quarter of the sample used tobacco and 87% used alcohol. Annual increases in household income were associated with the increased use of both tobacco and alcohol for people in households in the lowest 40% of the national income distribution (OR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.03–1.23 and OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.04–1.20, respectively) with no similar income effect observed for higher‐income households. In relation to smoking, the odds of a resident's tobacco use increased when their household was unemployed (OR = 1.32, 95% CI = 1.07–1.62). In relation to alcohol, the odds of use decreased when households were insecurely employed or unemployed, or housing costs were unaffordable (OR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.77–0.98, OR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.55–0.80 and OR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.75–0.93, respectively). This was also reflected in the reduced odds of risky drinking (defined in accordance with Australian guidelines) when housing became unaffordable or households became unemployed (OR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.81–0.99; OR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.69–0.98, respectively). Conclusions: In Australia, smoking and drinking appear to exhibit different socio‐behavioural characteristics and household unemployment appears to be a strong determinant of smoking.