Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Author’ response
Author’s reply
Authors' response
Authors#x2019; response
Book Received
Book Review
Book Reviews
Centenary Review Article
Clinical Image
Clinical Images
Commentary
Communicable Diseases - Original Articles
Correspondence
Correspondence, Letter to Editor
Correspondences
Correspondences & Authors’ Responses
Corrigendum
Critique
Current Issue
Editorial
Errata
Erratum
Health Technology Innovation
IAA CONSENSUS DOCUMENT
Innovations
Letter to Editor
Malnutrition & Other Health Issues - Original Articles
Media & News
Notice of Retraction
Obituary
Original Article
Original Articles
Perspective
Perspectives
Policy
Policy Document
Policy Guidelines
Policy, Review Article
Policy: Correspondence
Policy: Editorial
Policy: Mapping Review
Policy: Original Article
Policy: Perspective
Policy: Process Paper
Policy: Scoping Review
Policy: Special Report
Policy: Systematic Review
Policy: Viewpoint
Practice
Practice: Authors’ response
Practice: Book Review
Practice: Clinical Image
Practice: Commentary
Practice: Correspondence
Practice: Letter to Editor
Practice: Obituary
Practice: Original Article
Practice: Pages From History of Medicine
Practice: Perspective
Practice: Review Article
Practice: Short Note
Practice: Short Paper
Practice: Special Report
Practice: Student IJMR
Practice: Systematic Review
Pratice, Original Article
Pratice, Review Article
Pratice, Short Paper
Programme
Programme, Correspondence, Letter to Editor
Programme: Commentary
Programme: Correspondence
Programme: Editorial
Programme: Original Article
Programme: Originial Article
Programme: Perspective
Programme: Rapid Review
Programme: Review Article
Programme: Short Paper
Programme: Special Report
Programme: Status Paper
Programme: Systematic Review
Programme: Viewpoint
Protocol
Research Correspondence
Retraction
Review Article
Short Paper
Special Opinion Paper
Special Report
Special Section Nutrition & Food Security
Status Paper
Status Report
Strategy
Student IJMR
Systematic Article
Systematic Review
Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis
Viewpoint
White Paper
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Author’ response
Author’s reply
Authors' response
Authors#x2019; response
Book Received
Book Review
Book Reviews
Centenary Review Article
Clinical Image
Clinical Images
Commentary
Communicable Diseases - Original Articles
Correspondence
Correspondence, Letter to Editor
Correspondences
Correspondences & Authors’ Responses
Corrigendum
Critique
Current Issue
Editorial
Errata
Erratum
Health Technology Innovation
IAA CONSENSUS DOCUMENT
Innovations
Letter to Editor
Malnutrition & Other Health Issues - Original Articles
Media & News
Notice of Retraction
Obituary
Original Article
Original Articles
Perspective
Perspectives
Policy
Policy Document
Policy Guidelines
Policy, Review Article
Policy: Correspondence
Policy: Editorial
Policy: Mapping Review
Policy: Original Article
Policy: Perspective
Policy: Process Paper
Policy: Scoping Review
Policy: Special Report
Policy: Systematic Review
Policy: Viewpoint
Practice
Practice: Authors’ response
Practice: Book Review
Practice: Clinical Image
Practice: Commentary
Practice: Correspondence
Practice: Letter to Editor
Practice: Obituary
Practice: Original Article
Practice: Pages From History of Medicine
Practice: Perspective
Practice: Review Article
Practice: Short Note
Practice: Short Paper
Practice: Special Report
Practice: Student IJMR
Practice: Systematic Review
Pratice, Original Article
Pratice, Review Article
Pratice, Short Paper
Programme
Programme, Correspondence, Letter to Editor
Programme: Commentary
Programme: Correspondence
Programme: Editorial
Programme: Original Article
Programme: Originial Article
Programme: Perspective
Programme: Rapid Review
Programme: Review Article
Programme: Short Paper
Programme: Special Report
Programme: Status Paper
Programme: Systematic Review
Programme: Viewpoint
Protocol
Research Correspondence
Retraction
Review Article
Short Paper
Special Opinion Paper
Special Report
Special Section Nutrition & Food Security
Status Paper
Status Report
Strategy
Student IJMR
Systematic Article
Systematic Review
Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis
Viewpoint
White Paper
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Original Article
148 (
1
); 110-115
doi:
10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_288_18

Implementation of Article 20 of the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control

School of Preventive Oncology, Patna, India
Data Management Laboratory, ICMR-National Institute of Cancer Prevention & Research, Noida, India
Division of Cytopathology, ICMR-National Institute of Cancer Prevention & Research, Noida, India
WHO FCTC Global Knowledge Hub for Smokeless Tobacco, ICMR-National Institute of Cancer Prevention & Research, Noida, India

For correspondence: Dr Dhirendra Narain Sinha, School of Preventive Oncology, A/27, Anand Puri, West Boring Canal Road, Patna 800 001, Bihar, India e-mail: dhirendrasinha1@gmail.com

Licence

This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Disclaimer:
This article was originally published by Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd and was migrated to Scientific Scholar after the change of Publisher.

Abstract

Background & objectives:

Article 20 of the World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) deals with surveillance and research on all tobacco products including smokeless tobacco (SLT). Here we describe the availability of indicators related to SLT among 180 Parties to the convention (countries ratifying the WHO FCTC are referred as Parties to the Convention).

Methods:

Data on SLT use among adults and adolescents and SLT-related economic and health indicators among Parties were obtained through rigorous literature search. Data analysis for high-burden parties was done using SPSS.

Results:

Nearly 92 per cent (166) of the Parties reported SLT use prevalence among adults or adolescents at national or subnational level, of these nearly one-fifth of the Parties (20.5%) were high-burden Parties. Comparable SLT tax incidence rate was available for 19.4 per cent (n=35) Parties, and SLT attributable morbidity and mortality risks of major diseases were available for only five per cent (n=10) of Parties.

Interpretation & conclusions:

SLT use is a global epidemic widespread among Parties to the Convention. There are a data gap and dearth of research on SLT-related issues. Parties need to monitor SLT use and related health and economic indicators regularly at periodic intervals.

Keywords

Economics
health
prevalence
smokeless tobacco
WHO FCTC

Member countries that have ratified World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) are called ‘Parties to the Convention’. There are 181 Parties to the Convention including 180 countries and European Union1. Article 20 of the WHO FCTC deals with research, surveillance and exchange of information on tobacco products including smokeless tobacco (SLT). In the context of SLT control, the Article mandates to carry out appropriate scientific national research and the establishment of surveillance mechanisms. It also mandates undertaking of programmes that address the magnitude, patterns, determinants, related social, economic and health indicators and consequences of SLT consumption. This Article also includes information regarding how to facilitate the cooperative exchange of SLT control-related information and provision of support, with special focus on developing Parties2.

Parties to the Convention report progress on individual Articles including Article 20. Last two global progress reports on implementation of WHO FCTC (2014 and 2016) reported on SLT use prevalence indicators345. According to the FCTC global implementation report 2016, about 47 per cent of the reporting Parties (n=132) provided data on the prevalence of SLT use among adults. Around 12 per cent of the reporting Parties were identified as having at least two comparable datasets across all reporting cycles for adult SLT use. Last global progress report of 2016 presented SLT use indicator among 132 of all Parties to the Convention4. This study was conducted to document progress of Article 20 on SLT use prevalence and its related indicators such as health and economic indicators among all Parties to the Convention.

Material & Methods

All 180 Parties to the Convention were included in the analysis. The European Union as a Party was excluded (as it represents a group of countries that are already included in 180 Parties).

Data sources:

  1. Tobacco use prevalence among adults and adolescents was obtained from the health survey reports of individual countries, from Global Tobacco Surveillance System - Global Adult Tobacco Survey, Global Youth Tobacco Survey, Demographic Health Survey, WHO STEPwise NCD Risk Factors survey and Global School Health Survey reports or published data in indexed journals and secondary analysis from the original sources3456789101112131415. We included national and subnational data from all Parties, provided that they met indicator definition (Table I). National data of a country were included if the sample was designed to estimate their national prevalence either by combining their regional estimates or rough national estimates. Subnational estimates were defined if this sample was drawn from one such geographic region of the country.

  2. Data on health impacts of SLT use (morbidity and mortality) were obtained from published cohort and case-control studies1617181920212223242526272829303132333435.

  3. Data on economics of SLT control were obtained from two sources: (a) Comparable tax data on SLT products obtained from the WHO Global Tobacco Epidemic Reports of 2015 and 201789. Data reported by countries where methodology was not provided, were excluded from this study; (b) Costs incurred attributable to SLT use and incomes from SLT were collected from country reports commissioned by Governments or WHO36373839.

Table I Definitions of the indicators evaluated in this study

Results & Discussion

Parties having prevalence data at either national or subnational level among adults or adolescents: Nearly 92 per cent (n=165) of the Parties had SLT use information for adults or adolescents either at national or subnational levels.

Parties having SLT use data among adults: Prevalence of SLT use for adults at a national level was available for 74.4 per cent (n=134) of the Parties. In addition, there were subnational estimates for SLT use among adults in Chad, Guinea, Sudan and Federated States of Micronesia (2.2% of the Parties). Altogether, there were 76.6 per cent of the Parties (n=138) which had adult SLT use prevalence data either at national or subnational level (Table II). Nearly 33 per cent of Parties had recent SLT use prevalence data (Table II). Most of them were high resource countries [high-income countries (HIC) and upper-middle income countries (UMIC)]. Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Colombia, Comoros, Iceland, India, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malaysia, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Norway, Pakistan, Palau, Solomon Island, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Timor-Leste, Uzbekistan and Yemen were the high-burden Parties having the prevalence of SLT use ≥10 per cent (either male or female). These together accounted for 14.4 per cent (n=26) of the Parties (Tables II & III).

Table II Number and percentage of Parties having data on prevalence, health and economic indicators of smokeless tobacco (SLT) use

Parties having SLT use data among adolescents: Nearly 67.7 per cent (n=122) of the Parties reported SLT use among adolescents at national level. Angola, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Gambia, Liberia, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, United Republic of Tanzania and Zambia provided subnational data (6%) (Table II). Nearly 44.4 per cent (n=80) of the Parties had recent data (after 2013) on adolescent SLT prevalence (Table II), mostly from HIC and UMIC). Bhutan, Botswana, Congo, Croatia, Dominica, Iceland, India, Lesotho, Malaysia, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States), Mongolia, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Norway, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Tonga, Uganda and Vanuatu were high-burden Parties having prevalence ≥10 per cent (either male or female adolescents) and accounted for 11.6 per cent of the Parties (Tables II & III).

Table III High-burden parties having prevalence of smokeless tobacco use ≥10% either in males or females

Overall SLT use prevalence: Overall, 92 per cent of the Parties (n=166) had SLT use prevalence among adults or adolescents either at national or subnational level (Table II). Thirty seven Parties (20.5%) were high-burden Parties where the prevalence of SLT use was 10 per cent or higher among adolescents or adults (Tables II & III).

Smokeless tobacco-related health indicators: Only 10 Parties (Bangladesh, India, Iran, Norway, Pakistan, Sweden, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, South Africa and Yemen) had data on risks known for major diseases attributable to SLT use (Table II). Major diseases included were oral cancers, other cancers, cardiovascular diseases and adverse reproductive outcomes. Oral cancer risk among adult SLT users was available for six Parties only (Sweden, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sudan and Saudi Arabia). Risk estimate of other cancers among adult SLT users was available for five Parties only (Sweden, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Yemen). Risk estimate of cardiovascular diseases among SLT users was available for six Parties only (Sweden, Norway, India, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Iran). Risk estimate of adverse reproductive outcomes among female adult SLT users was available for four Parties only (Sweden, India, Bangladesh and South Africa). All-cause mortality among adult SLT users was available for three Parties only (Sweden, India and Bangladesh). Cancer mortality among SLT users was available for three Parties only (Sweden, India and Bangladesh). Mortality estimate due to oral/oropharyngeal/upper aerodigestive tract cancers among SLT users was available for one Party only (India). Cardiovascular mortality estimate among adult SLT users was available for three Parties only (Sweden, India and Iran).

Economic indicators related to SLT use: Thirty five Parties had comparable price and tax incidence rates for SLT at one point of time and all are recent (Table II). Eight Parties have comparable price and tax incidence rates for SLT for more than one point of time. India conducted health cost studies attributable to SLT for two rounds and Bangladesh for one round during 2004-2006.

Parties to the Convention are obligated to carry out surveillance and research on SLT use and related indicators. This study showed that SLT use was widely prevalent among 92 per cent of Parties. Prior studies have also indicated that SLT use is a global epidemic56789. There is now ample evidence from studies56739, including the present one, that SLT burden is mainly concentrated in developing world. Data gap on evidence collection on SLT-related indicators can partly be attributed to inadequate resources and capacities for surveillance and research in low-income countries as well as low- and middle-income countries5. There was lack of data for SLT use in eight per cent of the Parties. There could be different reasons for this data gap such as ignorance and lack of commitment for SLT control among many parties. Many data sources were not in public domain and many reports were in regional languages. Another notable finding was non-availability of recent data from many Parties.

Robust research, surveillance systems and monitoring programmes are critical to the success of addressing the global SLT epidemic. Our study had certain limitations. The data analysed in this study pertained only to the available data in English language literature and thus could be underrepresented. Comparability of data was also a major issue.

In conclusion, Parties (especially in SEAR and in low- and low-middle-income countries) should establish sustainable resources for periodic monitoring of the magnitude, patterns, determinants and related social, economic and health consequences of SLT use. Parties should contact and communicate with international partners to strengthen resources and build capacity for monitoring and research on specific tobacco control issues in their respective countries.

Financial support & sponsorship: None.

Conflicts of Interest: None.

References

  1. United Nations Treaty Collection, World Health Organization. Parties to the WHO framework convention on tobacco control. . Available from: https://treaties.un.org/pages/viewdetails.aspx?src=treaty&mtdsg_no=ix-4&chapter=9&clang=_en
    [Google Scholar]
  2. . WHO framework convention on tobacco control. . Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; Available from: http://www.who.int/fctc/text_download/en/
    [Google Scholar]
  3. WHO FCTC. Global progress report on implementation of the WHO framework convention on tobacco control. . Geneva: WHO; Available from: http://www.who.int/fctc/reporting/2014globalprogressreport.pdf?ua=1
    [Google Scholar]
  4. WHO FCTC. Global progress report on implementation of the WHO framework convention on tobacco control. . Geneva: World Health Organization; Available from: http://www.who.int/fctc/reporting/2016_global_progress_report.pdf?ua=1
    [Google Scholar]
  5. , , , , , , . The poorest of poor suffer the greatest burden from smokeless tobacco use: A study from 140 countries. Nicotine Tob Res 2017 Dec 22 doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntx276
    [Google Scholar]
  6. , , , , , , . Smokeless tobacco use among adolescents in global perspective. Nicotine Tob Res. 2017;19:1395-6.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. . Smokeless tobacco and public health: A global perspective. NIH Publication No 14-7983. . Bethesda, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute; Available from: https://www.cancercontrol.cancer.gov/brp/tcrb/global-perspective/SmokelessTobaccoAndPublicHealth.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  8. . WHO Report on the Global Tobacco Epidemic, 2015: Raising taxes on tobacco. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/178574/1/9789240694606_eng.pdf?ua=1&ua=1
    [Google Scholar]
  9. . WHO Report on the Global Tobacco Epidemic, 2017: Monitoring tobacco use and prevention policies. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/255874/1/9789241512824-eng.pdf?ua=1&ua=1
    [Google Scholar]
  10. , , . Prevalence and social determinants of smoking in 15 countries from North Africa, central and Western Asia, Latin America and Caribbean: Secondary data analyses of demographic and health surveys. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0130104.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. , , , . Prevalence, distribution, and social determinants of tobacco use in 30 sub-Saharan African countries. BMC Med. 2014;12:243.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. , , , , . Smoking and smokeless tobacco use in nine South and Southeast Asian countries: Prevalence estimates and social determinants from demographic and health surveys. Popul Health Metr. 2014;12:22.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Global Tobacco Surveillance System Data, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/global/gtss/gtssdata/index.html
    [Google Scholar]
  14. , , , , , , . The World Health Organization STEPwise approach to noncommunicable disease risk-factor surveillance: Methods, challenges, and opportunities. Am J Public Health. 2016;106:74-8.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Demographic and health surveys. . Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; Available from: https://www.dhsprogram.com
    [Google Scholar]
  16. , , , , , . Smokeless tobacco and cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2008;9:667-75.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. , , . Use of smokeless tobacco and risk of myocardial infarction and stroke: Systematic review with meta-analysis. BMJ. 2009;339:b3060.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. , , , . Use of smokeless tobacco and risk of cardiovascular disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2016;23:1970-81.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. , , , , , , . Global burden of all-cause and cause-specific mortality due to smokeless tobacco use: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Tob Control. 2018;27:35-42.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. , , , , , , . Global burden of disease due to smokeless tobacco consumption in adults: Analysis of data from 113 countries. BMC Med. 2015;13:194.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. , , , . Smokeless tobacco-associated cancers: A systematic review and meta-analysis of Indian studies. Int J Cancer. 2016;138:1368-79.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. , , , . Toombak dipping and cancer of the oral cavity in the Sudan: A case-control study. Int J Cancer. 1995;63:477-80.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. , , , , , , . Oral use of Swedish moist snuff (snus) and risk for cancer of the mouth, lung, and pancreas in male construction workers: A retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 2007;369:2015-20.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. , , . Tobacco chewing and adult mortality: A case-control analysis of 22,000 cases and 429,000 controls, never smoking tobacco and never drinking alcohol, in South India. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2015;16:1201-6.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. , , . Ambulatory 24-h blood pressure monitoring in healthy, middle-aged smokeless tobacco users, smokers and nontobacco users. Am J Hyertens. 1998;11:1153-63.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. , , , , . Risk of hypertension amongst Swedish male snuff users: A prospective study. J Intern Med. 2008;264:187-94.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. , , . Snuff use and risk for hypertension among black South African women. South Afr Fam Pract. 2008;50:64.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. , , , , , , . Prevalence of abnormal spermatozoa in tobacco chewing sub-fertile males. J Hum Reprod Sci. 2014;7:136-42.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. , , , , , , . Non-cigarette tobacco use among women and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2010;89:454-64.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. , , , , , . Effect of Swedish snuff (snus) on preterm birth. BJOG. 2010;117:1005-10.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. , , , , . Influence of snuff and smoking habits in early pregnancy on risks for stillbirth and early neonatal mortality. Nicotine Tob Res. 2014;16:78-83.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. , , , , . Changes in snuff and smoking habits in Swedish pregnant women and risk for small for gestational age births. BJOG. 2013;120:456-62.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. , , . Smokeless tobacco use and risk of stillbirth: A cohort study in Mumbai, India. Epidemiology. 2006;17:47-51.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. , , , , , . Maternal smokeless tobacco use in pregnancy and adverse health outcomes in newborns: A systematic review. Nicotine Tob Res. 2015;17:1058-66.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. , , . The human cost of tobacco chewing among pregnant women in India: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2016;66:161-6.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. , . Conversation with Dr. G. K. Rath. J Cancer Res Ther. 2011;7:235-6. Interviewed by Sapna Gupta
    [Google Scholar]
  37. . Economic burden of tobacco related diseases in India, executive summary. . New Delhi: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare; Available from: http://www.searo.who.int/india/topics/tobacco/economic_burden_of_tobacco_related_diseases_in_india_executive_summary.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  38. . Impact of tobacco related illnesses in Bangladesh. Bangladesh health cost study. . New Delhi: WHO Regional Office for South-East Asia; Available from: http://www.searo.who.int/tobacco/documents/2007-pub1.pdf?ua=1
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Global smokeless tobacco control policies and their implementation. (1st ed). Noida: ICMR - National Institute of Cancer Prevention and Research; .
    [Google Scholar]
Show Sections
Scroll to Top