1

Long-term benefit of increasing the prominence of a quitline number on cigarette packaging

Nick Wilson, Judy Li, Janet Hoek, Nick Wilson, Judy Li, Janet Hoek, Richard EdwardsRichard Edwards*, *,

Jo PeaceJo Peace

University of Otago (Wellington & Dunedin)University of Otago (Wellington & Dunedin)

New Zealand New Zealand

*Richard.Edwards@otago.ac.nz*Richard.Edwards@otago.ac.nz

2

Background & Methods

In 2008: new PIn 2008: new PHWs required to have the HWs required to have the national “Quitline” no. (previously unclear national “Quitline” no. (previously unclear what the telephone no. was for) what the telephone no. was for)

Data source: Routine Quitline service data Data source: Routine Quitline service data (new callers are asked where they sourced (new callers are asked where they sourced the Quitline number) the Quitline number)

3

Results

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sou

rce

of Q

uitli

ne n

umbe

r (%

)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

TAR

Ps

per

mon

th*

Television Tobacco packaging TARPs/month

Start of PHW phase-in ↓

4

Results & Discussion

This suggests a long-term benefit (short-term response of This suggests a long-term benefit (short-term response of Quitline no. on packs seen in: Australia,Quitline no. on packs seen in: Australia, Brazil, Brazil,

Netherlands, Singapore & UK).Netherlands, Singapore & UK).

Similar proportions citing tobacco packaging (as the Similar proportions citing tobacco packaging (as the source of the Quitline no.) in the last 12m period: source of the Quitline no.) in the last 12m period: Māori (21%), Māori (21%), Pacific (26%), Pacific (26%), European/Other (23%). European/Other (23%).

5

Still opportunities to improve Quitline no. visibility & reduce visual clutter of PHWs

NZ example

Australian example