Oxford University Press, Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 6(22), p. 942-949, 2019
DOI: 10.1093/ntr/ntz082
Full text: Download
Abstract Introduction Understanding the use of cheaper roll-your-own (RYO) cigarettes may have implications for tobacco tax policy. We examined trends in RYO cigarette use in England between 2008 and 2017, and characterized users’ sociodemographic and smoking profiles. Methods We used data from 211 469 respondents to a survey representative of the adult (≥16 years) population. In current smokers across the entire study period (n = 43 389), we assessed multivariable associations between cigarette type (RYO or factory-made [FM]) and sociodemographic and smoking characteristics. Among current smokers in 2008 and 2017 (n = 7685), we tested interactions between year and cigarette type to assess the stability of each characteristic. Results Between 2008 and 2017, FM cigarette use declined from 15.3% to 9.2% whereas RYO use increased from 6.7% to 8.1%. Greater odds of RYO use were observed among younger, male smokers from lower social grades, who were more addicted and used electronic cigarettes (ORrange = 1.28–1.86, p < .001). Lower odds of RYO use were observed among nondaily smokers, those with high motivation to stop, and higher spending on smoking (ORrange = 0.46–0.89, p ≤ .001). The RYO smoker profile was relatively stable between 2008 and 2017. However, compared with FM use, RYO use increased in younger (p < .001) and female (p = .019) smokers, and there was a relatively smaller decline in the proportion cutting down or trying to quit (p = .004). Conclusion In England, RYO use increased when overall smoking prevalence and FM use decreased. The profile of RYO smokers remained relatively stable, with users typically younger, male, more addicted, deprived, spending less on smoking, and less inclined to quit than FM smokers. Implications This population-based study provides novel insight into recent trends in RYO use in England, providing an up-to-date understanding of the profile of RYO smokers. Without the consistent application of tax across the range of combustible products, smokers who are more dependent are able to capitalize on the lower cost of RYO in order to continue smoking, undermining the potential benefit of taxation on cessation.