Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 106, Issue 3, pp e115–e120 | Cite as

Patterns and trends in gambling participation in the Quebec population between 2009 and 2012

  • Sylvia KairouzEmail author
  • Catherine Paradis
  • Louise Nadeau
  • Denis Hamel
  • Chantal Robillard
Quantitative Research
  • 1 Downloads

Abstract

Objectives

To describe gambling practices and trends in Quebec between 2009 and 2012 given that, in Canada, public funding allocation to address the risks associated with gambling practices should be based on valid prevalence data and knowledge of patterns and trends in vulnerable populations.

Methods

The study data were taken from the 2009 and 2012 cross-sectional waves of the Enquête sur les habitudes de jeu des Québécois (ENHJEU-Québec). The analytical sample consisted of 11,888 respondents in 2009 and 12,008 respondents in 2012.

Results

The prevalence of lifetime non-gamblers in the adult population of Quebec increased from 1 3.6% in 2009 to 16.4% in 2012, and past-year gambling participation decreased from 70.5% to 66.2%. Changes in gambling patterns were not contingent on demographic characteristics; gambling prevalence decreased in all subcategories. The proportion of problem and low-risk gamblers remained unchanged, whereas the prevalence of non-problem gamblers decreased significantly from 66.1 % in 2009 to 61.5% in 2012.

Conclusion

Gambling participation in Quebec is decreasing, though the proportion of problem gamblers remains stable. Given these findings, allocation of public resources for health care services should be maintained. Secondary and primary prevention efforts need to be initiated or maintained to prevent gambling harm.

Key words

Gambling pathological gambling risk prevalence studies epidemiology 

Résumé

Objectifs

Décrire les pratiques de jeux de hasard et d’argent (JHA) au Québec entre 2009 et 2012, tenant compte du fait qu’au Canada, l’allocation de fonds publics pour la prévention des risques associés aux pratiques de JHA se base sur des données de prévalence valides et les tendances observées dans les populations vulnérables.

Méthodes

Les données proviennent des vagues transversales de l’Enquête sur les habitudes de jeu des Québécois (ENHJEU-Québec) de 2009 et 2012. Les échantillons incluent 11 888 répondants en 2009 et 12 008 répondants en 2012.

Résultats

La prévalence des individus n’ayant jamais joué à des JHA dans la population adulte du Québec a augmenté de 1 3,6 % en 2009 à 16,4 % en 2012, tandis que la participation aux JHA a diminué de 70,5 % à 66,2 % dans la dernière année. Les analyses ne révèlent pas d’associations significatives entre les habitudes de JHA et les caractéristiques démographiques des répondants; la prévalence des JHA a généralement décru pour tous les sous-groupes sociodémographiques. La proportion de joueurs problématiques et de joueurs à faible risque est demeurée inchangée, alors que la prévalence des joueurs non-problématiques a diminué significativement de 66,1 % en 2009 à 61,5 % en 2012.

Conclusion

La participation aux JHA au Québec est en diminution, bien que la proportion de joueurs reste stable. Étant donné ces résultats, l’allocation de ressources publiques pour les services de santé doit être maintenue. Les efforts pour la prévention primaire et secondaire doivent être déployés ou maintenus pour prévenir les méfaits associés aux JHA.

Mots Clés

JHA jeu pathologique risque études de prévalence épidémiologie 

References

  1. 1.
    Romild U, Volberg R, Abbott M. The Swedish longitudinal gambling study (Swelogs): Design and methods of the epidemiological (EP) track. Int J Method Psych 2014;23(3):372–86. PMID: 24942902. doi: 10.1002/mpr.l449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abbott MW, Romild U, Volberg RA. Gambling and problem gambling in Sweden: Changes between 1998 and 2009. J Gambl Stud 2014;30(4):985–99. PMID: 23832754. doi: 10.1007/s10899-013-9396-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wardle H, Moody A, Spence S, Ordord J, Volberg R, Jotangia D, et al. British Gambling Prevalence Survey 2010. London, UK: National Centre for Social Research, 2010. Available at: https://doi.org/www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/PDF/British%20Gambling%20Prevalence%20Survey%202010.pdf (Accessed October 9, 2014).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Christensen DR, Dowling NA, Jackson AC, Thomas SA. Gambling participation and problem gambling severity in a stratified random survey: Findings from the second Social and Economic Impact Study of Gambling in Tasmania. J Gambl Stud 2014;29:1–19. PMID: 25167843.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cox BJ, Yu N, Afifi TO, Ladouceur R. A national survey of gambling problems in Canada. Can J Psychiatry 2005;50(4):213–17. PMID: 15898460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Focal Research Consultants. 2007 Adult Gambling Prevalence Study. Halifax, NS: Nova Scotia Health Promotion and Protection, 2008. Available at: https://doi.org/www.nsgamingfoundation.org/uploads/Adult_Gambling_Report.pdf (Accessed October 9, 2014).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    H Gambling and Problem Gambling in Saskatchewan: Final Report. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, 2002. Available at: https://doi.org/www.health.gov.sk.ca/adx/aspx/adxGetMedia.aspx?DocID=317,94,88,Documents&MediaID=166&Filename=gambling-final-report.pdf (Accessed December 29, 2014).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Canadian Partnership for Responsible Gambling. Canadian Gambling Digest, 2012–2013, 2014. Available at: https://doi.org/cprg.ca/articles/Canadian%20Gambling%20Digest%202012–13.pdf (Accessed December 29, 2014).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Canadian Partnership for Responsible Gambling. Canadian Gambling Digest, 2011–2012, 2013. Available at: https://doi.org/cprg.ca/articles/Canadian%20Gambling%20Digest%202011–12.pdf (Accessed October 9, 2014).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Doiron J. Gambling and problem gambling in Prince Edward Island. Submitted to Prince Edward Island Department of Health, 2006. Available at: https://doi.org/www.gov.pe.ca/photos/original/doh_GambReport.pdf (Accessed October 9, 2014).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Manitobans and Gambling III. Winnipeg: Manitoba Gaming Control Commission, 2010. Available at: https://doi.org/lgamanitoba.ca/documents/manito-bans-and-gambling-iii-reportpdf (Accessed October 9, 2014).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ladouceur R. The prevalence of pathological gambling in Canada. J Gambl Stud 1996;12(2):129–42. PMID: 24233912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ladouceur R, Jacques C, Chevalier S, Sévigny S, Hamel D, Allard D. Prévalence des habitudes de jeu et du jeu pathologique au Québec en 2002, Quebec, QC Université de Laval, 2004.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Currie SR, Hodgins DC, Casey DM. Validity of the Problem Gambling Severity Index interpretive categories. J Gambl Stud 2013;29:311–27. PMID: 22426971. doi: 10.1007/s10899-012-9300-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Williams RJ, Volberg RA, Stevens RMG. The Population Prevalence of Problem Gambling: Methodological Influences, Standardized Rates, Jurisdictional Differences, and Worldwide Trends. Lethbridge, AB: Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre and Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, May 8, 2012. Available at: https://doi.org/hdl.handle.net/10133/3068 (Accessed October 9, 2014).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shaffer HJ. From disabling to enabling the public interest: Natural transitions from gambling exposure to adaptation and self-regulation. Addiction 2005;100(9):1227–30. PMID: 16128708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tovar M-L, Costes J-M, Eroukmanoff V. Les jeux d’argent et de hasard sur Internet en France en 2012, 2013. Available at: https://doi.org/www.ofdt.fr/BDD/publi-cations/docs/eftxmtt6.pdf (Accessed December 29, 2014).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Marsan J-S. Loto-Québec mise sur les pools de hockey. Journal de Montréal 2014 September 4;Sect Économie. Available at: https://doi.org/www.journaldemon-treal.com/2014/09/04/loto-quebec-mise-sur-les-pools-de-hockey (Accessed December 29, 2014).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Evans L, Delfabbro PH. Motivators for change and barriers to help-seeking in Australian problem gamblers. J Gambl Stud 2005;21:133–55. PMID: 15870984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Simoneau H, Contant É, Chauvet M. Obstacles au traitement du jeu pathologique dans la région des Laurentides. Montreal, QC: Centre Dollard- Cormier - Institut universitaire sur les dépendances, 2012.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stockwell T, Donath S, Cooper-Stanbury M, Chikritzhs T, Catalano P, Mateo C. Under-reporting of alcohol consumption in household surveys: A comparison of quantity-frequency graduated-frequency and recent recall. Addiction 2004;99(8):1024–33. PMID: 15265099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Knibbe RA, Bloomfield K. Alcohol consumption estimates in surveys in Europe: Comparability and sensitivity for gender differences. Subst Abus 2001;22(1):23–38. PMID: 12466667.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dawson DA. Alcohol consumption, alcohol dependence, and all-cause mortality. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 2000;24(1):72–81. PMID: 10656196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Williams RJ, Volberg RA. Best Practices in the Population Assessment of Problem Gambling. Guelph, ON: Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre, 2010.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sylvia Kairouz
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Catherine Paradis
    • 2
  • Louise Nadeau
    • 3
  • Denis Hamel
    • 4
  • Chantal Robillard
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Sociology and AnthropologyConcordia UniversityMontrealCanada
  2. 2.Research Chair on GamblingConcordia UniversityMontrealCanada
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyUniversité de MontréalMontrealCanada
  4. 4.Institut national de santé publique du Québec (INSPQ)QuébecCanada

Personalised recommendations