Skip to main content

Table 3 Weighted prevalence rates (%) of tobacco use, betel quid chewing and dual use by socio-demographic factors among men and women in Myanmar, 2015–16

From: Tobacco use and betel quid chewing among adults in Myanmar- estimates and social determinants from demographic and health survey, 2015–16

  MEN WOMEN
Tobacco use Betel quid Non-user tobacco or betel quid Dual user Tobacco use Betel quid Non-user tobacco or betel quid Dual user
Overall 40.9 58.9 24.6 50.4 25.0 3.7 18.2 80.1 17.9 2.04
Age groups
 15–20 24.4 41.4 50.3 33.6 16.1 0.5 5.7 93.9 5.9 0.2
 21–30 42.8 64.2 20.7 51.6 27.7 1.7 13.0 86.2 13.0 0.9
 31–40 44.7 62.8 19.6 53.3 27.1 4.3 23.1 75.1 22.3 2.6
 41–49 47.2 61.8 15.1 60.8 24.1 8.2 27.6 68.7 27.2 4.2
Education×
 No education 50.8 50.8 21.8 53.2 25.1 9.8 28.1 66.6 28.8 4.6
 Primary 41.5 66.3 17.1 55.7 27.2 4.9 24.7 73.1 23.9 3.0
 Secondary 37.6 56.4 29.5 46.1 24.3 1.0 11.2 88.4 10.9 0.6
 Higher 30.7 51.6 38.5 45.9 18.2 0.4 4.6 95.0 5.0
Marital status
 Never married 31.5 50.0 37.7 42.3 20.0 0.9 7.3 92.0 7.5 0.4
 Currently married 43.6 64.0 17.7 55.3 27.0 4.8 22.8 74.8 22.4 2.7
 Divorced/Separated/Widowed 69.5 55.5 16.0 40.9 43.0 6.2 30.9 67.0 28.7 4.2
Wealth Index
 Poorest 45.7 64.8 16.8 54.0 29.1 10.2 35.0 60.6 33.6 5.8
 Poorer 41.0 62.1 21.3 51.7 26.9 5.0 22.8 75.0 22.3 2.7
 Middle 39.3 59.5 24.4 51.3 24.2 2.9 16.2 82.3 16.3 1.4
 Richer 38.0 56.1 27.9 49.1 23.0 1.5 12.4 86.7 12.6 0.7
 Richest 36.9 52.9 31.7 46.1 22.0 0.6 8.2 91.5 8.2 0.3
Type of residence
 Rural 39.4 59.7 23.7 51.9 24.4 46.8 20.4 77.4 19.8 2.7
 Urban 41.7 57.1 27.0 46.6 26.4 1.1 12.8 86.4 13.2 0.4
Occupation
 Unemployed/domestic work 24.4 29.8 59.8 25.6 14.5 3.5 18.9 79.7 17.8 2.3
 Professional/service/sales 39.3 57.3 27.0 48.9 24.1 2.1 16.9 82.0 16.7 1.3
 Agricultural work 38.6 60.3 23.6 50.8 25.6 4.6 22.9 74.6 23.2 0.22
 Manual worker 43.0 62.3 20.0 53.9 26.1 4.5 16.6 81.1 16.5 2.4
  1. Chi square test was used to test the statistical significance of differences in tobacco use, betel quid chewing and dual use by sociodemographic factors all factors were statistically significant at p < 0.001 or p < 0.01 (betel quid by type of residence) except for tobacco use type of residence (p > 0.05)