Project description:IntroductionTobacco smoke exposure (TSE) has considerable adverse respiratory health impact among children. Smoke-free policies covering enclosed public places are known to reduce child TSE and benefit child health. An increasing number of jurisdictions are now expanding smoke-free policies to also cover outdoor areas and/or (semi)private spaces (indoor and/or outdoor). We aim to systematically review the evidence on the impact of these 'novel smoke-free policies' on children's TSE and respiratory health.Methods and analysis13 electronic databases will be searched by two independent reviewers for eligible studies. We will consult experts from the field and hand-search references and citations to identify additional published and unpublished studies. Study designs recommended by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) group are eligible, without restrictions on the observational period, publication date or language. Our primary outcomes are: self-reported or parental-reported TSE in places covered by the policy; unplanned hospital attendance for wheezing/asthma and unplanned hospital attendance for respiratory infections. We will assess risk of bias of individual studies following the EPOC or Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies of Interventions tool, as appropriate. We will conduct separate random effects meta-analyses for smoke-free policies covering (1) indoor private places, (2) indoor semiprivate places, (3) outdoor (semi)private places and (4) outdoor public places. We will assess whether the policies were associated with changes in TSE in other locations (eg, displacement). Subgroup analyses will be conducted based on country income classification (ie, high, middle or low income) and by socioeconomic status. Sensitivity analyses will be undertaken via broadening our study design eligibility criteria (ie, including non-EPOC designs) or via excluding studies with a high risk of bias. This review will inform policymakers regarding the implementation of extended smoke-free policies to safeguard children's health.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. Findings will be disseminated to academics and the general public.Prospero registration numberCRD42020190563.
Project description:BackgroundBangladesh is one of the highest tobacco-consuming countries in the world, with a large number of adult users of a variety of smoked and/or smokeless tobacco products. Bangladesh tobacco control act prohibits smoking in public places and requires the owners of public places to display 'no smoking' signages.ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to assess the level of compliance with the tobacco control act (smoke-free laws) in public places in a northeast city of Bangladesh.MethodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted between June 1 and August 25, 2020, across 673 public places in Sylhet city, Bangladesh. The data was collected using a structured observational checklist that included variables such as the presence of active smoking, the presence of designated smoking areas, the display of 'no smoking' signages, evidence of recent smoking such as ashes, butts/bidi ends, and the presence of smoking aids.ResultsAmong 673 public places, a total of 635 indoor locations and 313 outdoor locations were observed. Only 70 (11%) indoor locations were found to be in good compliance, and 388 (61.1%) indoor locations were found to be in moderate compliance with smoke-free laws. On the other hand, only 5 (1.6%) outdoor locations were in good compliance, and 63 (20.1%) outdoor locations were in moderate compliance with smoke-free laws. The overall compliance with smoke-free laws at indoor locations was 52.7%, and at outdoor locations was 26.5%. The highest compliance was observed at healthcare facilities (58.6%) and the least at transit points (35.7%) for indoor locations. In outdoor locations, the highest compliance was observed at offices and workplaces (37.1%) and the least at transit points (2.2%). Higher active smoking was observed in public places where there was an absence of 'no smoking' signage and the presence of points of sale (POSs) (p-value <0.05). Further, higher active smoking was observed in places where any smoking aids, cigarette butts, bidi ends, or ashes were present (p-value <0.05).ConclusionThis study found moderate compliance at indoor locations and very low compliance at outdoor locations. The government should focus more on implementing smoke-free laws in all kinds of public places, particularly at most frequently visited places and transit sites. 'No smoking' signages should be displayed per legislation across all public places. Policymakers should consider the prohibition of POS in/around a public place as it has a positive effect on smoking.
Project description:ObjectivePrior to December 2012, restaurants in South Korea were required to implement only partial smoking bans. This study documents the changes in Korean smokers' attitudes towards smoking bans between 2005 and 2010 and explores the effects of anti-smoking advertising as a correlate of support for total smoking bans in public places.DesignLongitudinal cohort study of Korean adult smokers.SettingThe data were derived from three waves (2005, 2008 and 2010) of the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Korea Survey.ParticipantsThe ITC Korea Survey respondents were a probability-based, nationally representative sample of Korean smokers aged 19 and older. The current analysis includes 995 smokers who participated in Wave 1 (2005), 1737 smokers who participated in Wave 2 (2008) and 1560 smokers who participated in Wave 3 (2010).Primary and secondary outcome measuresChanges in respondents' awareness of secondhand smoke (SHS) harm, attitudes towards smoking bans and personal rules for smoking in private homes and/or vehicles were analysed. Correlates of support for smoking bans in public places were examined using generalised estimating equation regression models.ResultsMore than 80% of Korean smokers are aware of the harms of SHS. The proportion of smokers who support smoke-free restaurants or smoke-free bars increased twofold between 2005 and 2010. Smokers who were aware of the dangers of SHS were more likely to support a total smoking ban in workplaces. Noticing anti-smoking advertising or information was not significantly associated with support for a total smoking ban in public places.ConclusionsKorean smokers became more supportive of smoking bans in public places between 2005 and 2008. These results show that smokers' attitudes towards smoking bans can change with the implementation of smoke-free policies, even in a country that has a high prevalence of smokers.
Project description:BackgroundSmoke-free legislation banning tobacco smoking in public places was implemented across Nepal in 2014 with the ambition to reduce the impact of second-hand smoking. As part of a comprehensive policy package on tobacco control, the implementation of the legislation has seen a marked reduction in tobacco consumption. Yet there remains uncertainty about the level of compliance with smoke-free public places.ObjectivesThis study assesses the compliance with smoke-free laws in public places and the factors associated with active smoking in public places in Biratnagar Metropolitan City, Nepal.MethodsA cross-sectional study was conducted in the Biratnagar metropolitan city in Province 1 of Nepal from July to December 2019. A total of 725 public places within the metropolitan city were surveyed using a structured survey tool. Active smoking was the primary outcome of the study which was defined as smoking by any person during the data collection time at the designated public place.ResultsThe overall compliance with smoke-free legislation was 56.4%. The highest compliance (75.0%) was observed in Government office buildings. The lowest compliance was observed in eateries, entertainment, and shopping venues (26.3%). There was a statistically significant association between active smoking and the presence of 'no smoking' notices appended at the entrance and the odds of active smoking in eateries, entertainment, hospitality, shopping venues, transportations and transits was higher compared to education and health care institutions. None of the 'no smoking' notices displayed fully adhered to the contents as prescribed by the law.ConclusionAs more than half of the public places complied with the requirements of the legislation, there was satisfactory overall compliance with the smoke-free public places law in this study. The public venues (eateries, shopping venues and transportations) that are more frequently visited and have a high turnover of the public have lower compliance with the legislation. The content of the message in the 'no smoking' notices needs close attention to adhere to the legal requirements.
Project description:Multiunit housing (MUH) operators may be motivated to adopt smoke-free policies to achieve cost savings. MUH caretakers provide a unique perspective for understanding the implications of smoke-free policies because of their role in property maintenance. We examine MUH caretakers' perceptions regarding the economic and personal impact of smoke-free policies at their properties.We conducted and analyzed qualitative interviews with 20 multiunit housing caretakers from two large property management companies in the southeastern United States that had implemented smoke-free policies.For non-smoking units, caretakers reported shortened turnover times, in addition to reduction in the need for turnover supplies and capital replacements. Caretakers reported an improvement in their work environments due to reduced workload and exposure to secondhand and thirdhand smoke after implementation of smoke-free policies.The potential for cost savings exists for MUH operators who enact smoke-free policies because of decreased labor, supplies, and capital costs. Smoke-free policies may also improve the work environment of caretakers and other frontline MUH employees. These are important findings for MUH companies seeking to lower their operation costs and improve their employees' working conditions, as well as for smoke-free advocates seeking to promote policy change.
Project description:ObjectiveThe 12-month impact of federally mandated smoke-free housing (SFH) policy adoption (July 2018) was assessed using two markers of ambient secondhand smoke (SHS): airborne nicotine and particulate matter at the 2.5-micrometer threshold (PM2.5).MethodsWe measured markers of SHS in Norfolk, VA from December 2017 to December 2018 in six federally subsidized multi-unit public housing buildings. Multi-level regression was used to model the following comparisons: (1) the month immediately before SFH implementation versus the month immediately after, and (2) December 2017 versus December 2018.ResultsThere was a 27% reduction in indoor PM2.5 and a 32% reduction in airborne nicotine in the first month after SFH adoption, compared to the month prior to adoption. However, there was a 33% increase in PM2.5 and a 25% increase in airborne nicotine after 12 months.ConclusionsUS Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-mandated SFH can reduce SHS in multi-unit housing. However, SFH could also plausibly increase indoor smoking. Policy approaches adopted by individual properties or housing authorities-for example, property-wide bans versus allowing designated smoking areas-could be driving this potential unintended consequence.ImplicationsSuccessful implementation of SFH by public housing authorities in response to the HUD rule requires ongoing attention to implementation strategies. In this sense, SFH likely differs from other policies that might be seen as less intrusive. Long-term success of SFH will depend on careful policy implementation, including plans to educate and support housing authority staff, inform and engage residents, and build effective partnerships with community agencies.
Project description:BackgroundSmoke-free policies are essential to protect people against tobacco smoke exposure. To successfully implement smoke-free policies that go beyond enclosed public places and workplaces, public support is important. We undertook a comprehensive systematic review of levels and determinants of public support for indoor (semi-)private and outdoor smoke-free policies.MethodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, six electronic databases were searched for studies (published between 1 January 2004 and 19 January 2022) reporting support for (semi-)private and outdoor smoke-free policies in representative samples of at least 400 respondents aged 16 years and above. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias of individual reports using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The primary outcome was proportion support for smoke-free policies, grouped according to location covered. Three-level meta-analyses, subgroup analyses and meta-regression were performed.Findings14,749 records were screened, of which 107 were included; 42 had low risk of bias and 65 were at moderate risk. 99 studies were included in the meta-analyses, reporting 326 measures of support from 896,016 individuals across 33 different countries. Support was pooled for indoor private areas (e.g., private cars, homes: 73%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 66-79), indoor semi-private areas (e.g., multi-unit housing: 70%, 95% CI: 48-86), outdoor hospitality areas (e.g., café and restaurant terraces: 50%, 95% CI: 43-56), outdoor non-hospitality areas (e.g., school grounds, playgrounds, parks, beaches: 69%, 95% CI: 64-73), outdoor semi-private areas (e.g., shared gardens: 67%, 95% CI: 53-79) and outdoor private areas (e.g., private balconies: 41%, 95% CI: 18-69). Subcategories showed highest support for smoke-free cars with children (86%, 95% CI: 81-89), playgrounds (80%, 95% CI: 74-86) and school grounds (76%, 95% CI: 69-83). Non-smokers and ex-smokers were more in favour of smoke-free policies compared to smokers. Support generally increased over time, and following implementation of each smoke-free policy.InterpretationOur findings suggested that public support for novel smoke-free policies is high, especially in places frequented by children. Governments should be reassured about public support for implementation of novel smoke-free policies.FundingDutch Heart Foundation, Lung Foundation Netherlands, Dutch Cancer Society, Dutch Diabetes Research Foundation and Netherlands Thrombosis Foundation.
Project description:IntroductionSecondhand smoke (SHS) exposure is a serious public health problem. This study aims to collect data on tobacco control since the implementation of the new version of the Smoke Control Ordinance in Public Places of Hangzhou (the Ordinance), combined with questionnaire surveys to understand the SHS exposure situation in public places, relevant knowledge and attitudes of residents in Hangzhou.MethodsWe used data from a population-based tobacco control survey of 2746 adults aged 15-75 years conducted in Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province in March 2023. Data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire consisting of demographic characteristics, exposure to tobacco, awareness of tobacco hazards, knowledge of the Ordinance, and behaviors and attitudes towards tobacco control in public places. Chi-squared tests were performed to examine the differences in knowledge and attitudes related to tobacco control in indoor public places among residents with different characteristics in Hangzhou. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify variables affecting satisfaction with the effectiveness of tobacco control in public places.ResultsOf the 2155 non-smokers, 1006 (46.68%) had been exposed to SHS in public places. More than 89.00% of participants supported the Ordinance. Satisfaction with effectiveness of tobacco control in public places in Hangzhou was 68.54%, and the subcomponents that influenced it were satisfaction with tobacco control publicity campaigns (AOR=1.85; 95% CI: 1.19-2.88), satisfaction with tobacco control surveillance and enforcement (AOR=3.91; 95% CI: 2.43-6.30), satisfaction with the smoke-free demonstration for government departments (AOR=5.79; 95% CI: 3.96-8.47), and satisfaction with individual tobacco control behavior (AOR=11.68; 95% CI: 8.53-15.99).ConclusionsIt is necessary to strengthen tobacco control publicity to increase the participation of residents and to gain a deeper understanding of the subjective willingness and needs of residents to participate in tobacco control campaigns in order to improve residents' individual satisfaction.
Project description:BackgroundPeople who smoke with serious mental illness carry disproportionate costs from smoking, including poor health and premature death from tobacco-related illnesses. Hospitals in New Zealand are ostensibly smoke-free; however, some mental health wards have resisted implementing this policy.AimThis study explored smoking in acute metal health wards using data emerging from a large sociological study on modern acute psychiatric units.MethodsEighty-five in-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with staff and service users from four units. Data were analysed using a social constructionist problem representation approach.ResultsAlthough high-level smoke-free policies were mandatory, most participants disregarded these policies and smoking occurred in internal courtyards. Staff reasoned that acute admissions were not the time to quit smoking, citing the sceptres of distress and possibly violence; further, they found smoking challenging to combat. Inconsistent enforcement of smoke-free policies was common and problematic. Many service users also rejected smoke-free policies; they considered smoking facilitated social connections, alleviated boredom, and helped them feel calm in a distressing environment - some started or increased smoking following admission. A minority viewed smoking as a problem; a fire hazard, or pollutant. No one mentioned its health risks.ConclusionPsychiatric wards remain overlooked corners where hospital smoke-free policies are inconsistently applied or ignored. Well-meaning staff hold strong but anachronistic views about smoking. To neglect smoking cessation support for people with serious mental illness is discriminatory and perpetuates health and socioeconomic inequities. However, blanket applications of generic policy are unlikely to succeed. Solutions may include myth-busting education for service users and staff, local champions, and strong managerial support and leadership, with additional resourcing during transition phases. Smoke-free policies need consistent application with non-judgemental NRT and, potentially, other treatments. Smoking cessation would be supported by better designed facilities with more options for alleviating boredom, expressing autonomy, facilitating social connections, and reducing distress.
Project description:BackgroundPrevious studies have reported a reduction in acute coronary events following smoke-free legislation. Evidence is lacking on whether stroke is also reduced. The aim was to determine whether the incidence of stroke, overall and by sub-type, fell following introduction of smoke-free legislation across Scotland on 26 March 2006.Methods and findingsA negative binomial regression model was used to determine whether the introduction of smoke-free legislation resulted in a step and/or slope change in stroke incidence. The model was adjusted for age-group, sex, socioeconomic deprivation quintile, urban/rural residence and month. Interaction tests were also performed. Routine hospital administrative data and death certificates were used to identify all hospital admissions and pre-hospital deaths due to stroke (ICD10 codes I61, I63 and I64) in Scotland between 2000 and 2010 inclusive. Prior to the legislation, rates of all stroke, intracerebral haemorrhage and unspecified stroke were decreasing, whilst cerebral infarction was increasing at 0.97% per annum. Following the legislation, there was a dramatic fall in cerebral infarctions that persisted for around 20 months. No visible effect was observed for other types of stroke. The model confirmed an 8.90% (95% CI 4.85, 12.77, p<0.001) stepwise reduction in cerebral infarction at the time the legislation was implemented, after adjustment for potential confounders.ConclusionsFollowing introduction of national, comprehensive smoke-free legislation there was a selective reduction in cerebral infarction that was not apparent in other types of stroke.