The MPOWER policy package enables countries to implement effective, evidence-based strategies to address the threat posed to their population by tobacco. All countries have challenges to overcome when implementing tobacco control policy. Some are generic such as tobacco industry efforts to undermine and circumvent legislation; others are specific to national or local context. Various factors influence how successfully challenges are addressed, including the legal-political framework for enforcement, public and administrative attitudes towards the law, and whether policy implementation measures are undertaken. This paper examines District Tobacco Control Taskforces, a flexible policy mechanism developed in Bangladesh to support the implementation of the Smoking and Tobacco Products Usage (Control) Act 2005 and its 2013 Amendment. At the time of this study published research and/or data was not available and understanding about these structures, their role, contribution, limitations and potential, was limited. We consider Taskforce characteristics and suggest that the “package” comprises a distinctive tobacco control implementation model. Qualitative data is presented from interviews with key informants in ten districts with activated taskforces (n = 70) to provide insight from the perspectives of taskforce members and non-members. In all ten districts taskforces were seen as a crucial tool for tobacco control implementation. Where taskforces were perceived to be functioning well, current positive impacts were perceived, including reduced smoking in public places and tobacco advertising, and increased public awareness and political profile. In districts with less well established taskforces, interviewees believed in their taskforce’s ‘potential’ to deliver similar benefits once their functioning was improved. Recommendations to improve functioning and enhance impact were made. The distinctive taskforce concept and lessons from their development may provide other countries with a flexible local implementation model for tobacco control.

Legislation has been at the forefront of public health since Victorian times. With the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), the WHO established that legislation is the most powerful means of combating the tobacco epidemic. In this chapter, we explore why legislation is necessary and effective for reducing tobacco consumption and the premature deaths it causes. We assess the uptake and efficacy of tobacco legislation across the globe, reviewing the 'MPOWER' measures of the WHO FCTC, outlining bold initiatives currently employed by governments and examining the characteristics of successful tobacco control laws. We also explore the challenges involved in creating, implementing and sustaining strong tobacco control legislation, challenges mainly caused by tobacco industry interference. With this chapter, we aim to give the reader a comprehensive overview of tobacco control legislation and its potential impact on the future of the tobacco control epidemic.

Three randomised controlled trials were identified. Two biomedical studies suggested HC action was unaffected by quick starting after UPA; one study examined ovarian quiescence (OR 1.27; 95% CI 0.51-3.18) while taking combined oral contraception (COC). Another assessed cervical mucus impenetrability (OR 0.76; 95% CI 0.27-2.13) while taking progestogen-only pills (POP). Quick starting POP reduced the ability of UPA to delay ovulation (OR 0.04; 95% CI 0.01-0.37). Side effects (OR 1.22; 95% CI 0.48-3.12) and unscheduled bleeding (OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.16-1.81) were unaffected by quick starting COC after UPA. Another study reported higher self-reported contraceptive use at 8 weeks among women quick starting POP after LNG, compared with women given LNG alone (OR 6.73; 95% CI 2.14-21.20).

IntroductionUnprotected intercourse after oral emergency contraception (EC) significantly increases pregnancy risk. This underlies the importance of promptly starting effective, ongoing contraception – known as ‘quick starting.’ However, theoretical concern exists that quick starting might interact with EC or hormonal contraception (HC) potentially causing adverse side effects.MethodsA systematic review was conducted, evaluating quick starting HC after oral EC (levonorgestrel 1.5mg [LNG] or ulipristal acetate 30mg [UPA]). PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov and relevant reference lists were searched in February 2016. A lack of comparable studies prevented meta-analysis.ResultsThree randomised controlled trials were identified. Two biomedical studies suggested HC action was unaffected by quick starting after UPA; one study examined ovarian quiescence (OR: 1.27; 95% CI 0.51 to 3.18) while taking combined oral contraception (COC). Another assessed cervical mucus impenetrability (OR: 0.76; 95% CI 0.27 to 2.13) while taking progestogen-only pills (POP). Quick starting POP reduced the ability of UPA to delay ovulation (OR: 0.04; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.37). Side effects (OR: 1.22; 95% CI 0.48 to 3.12) and unscheduled bleeding (OR: 0.53; 95% CI 0.16 to 1.81) were unaffected by quick starting COC after UPA. Another study reported higher self-reported contraceptive use at eight weeks among women quick starting POP after LNG, compared with women given LNG alone (OR: 6.73; 95% CI 2.14 to 21.20).DiscussionLimited evidence suggests quick starting HC after UPA does not reduce HC efficacy, however it reduces UPA efficacy. Consequently, women should delay starting HC after UPA.

No abstract