查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
| 題 名 | 傳統紙菸與電子煙使用族群對於菸害認知差異之研究=Differences of Tobacco Harm Recognition between Conventional Cigarettes and E-cigarettes User |
|---|---|
| 作 者 | 周愷璿; 張淳涵; | 書刊名 | 健康促進研究與實務 |
| 卷 期 | 8:2 2025.12[民114.12] |
| 頁 次 | 頁37-50 |
| 分類號 | 411.84 |
| 關鍵詞 | 國人吸菸行為調查; 電子煙; 傳統紙菸; 菸品危害認知; 戒菸管道認知; Adult smoking behavior system; E-cigarettes; Conventional cigarettes; Tobacco harm recognition; Smoking cessation recognition; |
| 語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
| DOI | 10.29442/HPRP.202512_8(2).0005 |
| 中文摘要 | 背景與目的:近年來電子煙盛行,然而現行菸害防制法僅規範傳統紙菸。國內雖有研究針對傳統紙菸及電子煙使用者之人口學特性進行比較,未有探討全國吸菸族群及不同菸品使用族群與菸害認知之關係,故本研究透過分析「國人吸菸行為調查(Adult Smoking Behavior Surveillance System, ASBS)」資料庫,瞭解傳統紙菸與電子煙使用族群在人口學特質及對於菸害認知之差異,以利未來針對兩個族群提供合適的菸害知識宣導與教育。研究方法:本研究為橫斷性研究,以2015年ASBS資料庫分析傳統紙菸與電子煙使用者之人口學特質,以及與菸品危害及戒菸管道認知之關係。使用分層隨機抽樣方式,以性別與年齡1:1之配對方式,選取傳統紙菸與電子煙使用族群。菸品危害及戒菸管道(戒菸方法、戒菸服務)認知皆分為知道及不知道兩組,並以卡方檢定與羅吉斯迴歸進行分析。研究結果:分層隨機配對後,傳統紙菸與電子煙使用者各464人,兩組在年齡與性別達成1:1配對,平均年齡約32.5歲,以男性居多(約八成)。電子煙使用者顯著集中於39歲以下、高學歷及高家庭收入族群,未婚比例亦較傳統紙菸使用者高(46.9% vs. 34.7%,p=0.003)。在菸害認知方面,電子煙使用者的認知顯著高於傳統紙菸使用者(92.7% vs. 86.9%,p=0.003),但經多元羅吉斯迴歸校正後,兩者間無顯著差異(Adjusted OR=1.614, 95%CI: 0.963-2.705)。在戒菸管道認知中,電子煙使用者對戒菸服務認知高於傳統紙菸使用者(Adjusted OR=1.413, 95%CI: 1.052-1.899, p<0.05);然而在戒菸方法認知方面,電子煙使用者反而顯著較低(Adjusted OR=0.682, 95%CI: 0.485-0.958, p<0.05)。結論與建議:傳統紙菸與電子煙之族群在人口學變項、菸品危害認知、以及戒菸服務認知上有顯著差異。建議未來在學術方面可採用縱貫性研究,並加入網路問卷調查;政策方面,未來可針對不同吸菸使用族群分別加強實施菸品危害、戒菸服務、及戒菸方法認知之加強。 |
| 英文摘要 | Background: Electronic cigarettes have become popular in recent years, but the current smoke control law only regulates traditional paper cigarettes. Although domestic studies have compared the demographic characteristics of conventional cigarettes and e-cigarette users, they have not explored the relationship between the national smoking groups and different tobacco use groups and the perception of tobacco harm. Therefore, this study analyzed the "Chinese smoking behavior survey (Adult Smoking Behavior Surveillance System, ASBS)" database to understand the demographic characteristics of conventional cigarettes and e-cigarette users and the differences in their perceptions of tobacco hazards, so as to provide appropriate tobacco hazard knowledge and education for the two groups . Methods: This study is a cross-sectional study, using the 2015 ASBS database to analyze the demographic characteristics of conventional cigarette and e-cigarette users, and their relationship with the perception of tobacco hazards and smoking cessation channels. Random stratified sampling is used to select conventional cigarette and electronic cigarette users with a 1:1 matching method of gender and age. The cognition of smoking hazards and smoking cessation pipes (smoking cessation methods, smoking cessation services) are divided into two groups: known and unaware, and analyzed by Chi-square test and Logistic regression. Results: After stratified random matching, 464 conventional cigarette users and 464 e-cigarette users were included. Both groups were matched 1:1 by age and gender, with a mean age of approximately 32.5 years, and around 80% were male. E-cigarette users were more likely to be under 39 years old, have higher education levels, higher household income, and be unmarried (46.9% vs. 34.7%, p=0.003). Regarding tobacco harm perception, e-cigarette users had a significantly higher awareness rate compared to conventional cigarette users (92.7% vs. 86.9%, p=0.003). However, after adjusting for demographic variables, the difference was not statistically significant (Adjusted OR=1.614, 95% CI: 0.963-2.705). In terms of smoking cessation service awareness, e-cigarette users showed significantly higher recognition than conventional cigarette users (Adjusted OR=1.413, 95% CI: 1.052-1.899, p<0.05). Conversely, e-cigarette users were less likely to be aware of specific cessation methods (Adjusted OR=0.682, 95% CI: 0.485-0.958, p<0.05). Conclusions: There are significant differences between conventional cigarettes and e-cigarettes in demographic characteristics, recognition of tobacco hazards and smoking cessation services. It is recommended that future research may adopt longitudinal design and online questionnaires. In terms of policy, the implementation of smoking hazards, smoking cessation services, and awareness of smoking cessation methods should strengthen for different smoking groups. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。