Correlates of the support for smoke-free policies among smokers: A cross-sectional study in six European countries of the EUREST-PLUS ITC EUROPE SURVEYS.
ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:This report describes the support for smoke-free policies in different settings among smokers in six European countries and the relationship between their opinions about the places where smoking should be banned and their beliefs about the harms of secondhand smoke to non-smokers. METHODS:A cross-sectional survey (the ITC 6 European Country Survey, part of the EUREST-PLUS Project) was conducted using nationally representative samples of adult smokers in Germany, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Spain (n=6011). We describe the prevalence of agreement and support for smoke-free policies in different settings according to sociodemographics, smoking characteristics and beliefs about the danger of secondhand smoke to non-smokers. RESULTS:There was high agreement with smoking regulations in cars with preschool children and in schoolyards of primary/secondary schools (>90% overall) and low agreement with banning smoking in outdoor terraces of bars/pubs (8.6%; 95%CI: 7.5%-9.8%) and restaurants (10.1%; 95%CI: 8.9%-11.4%). The highest support for complete smoking bans inside public places came from smokers in Poland, among women, people aged ≥25 years, who had low nicotine dependence, and who tried to quit smoking in the last 12 months. About 78% of participants agreed that tobacco smoke is dangerous to non-smokers, ranging from 63.1% in Hungary to 88.3% in Romania; the highest agreement was noted among women, the 25-54 age groups, those with higher education, low cigarette dependence, and those who tried to quit in the last 12 months. The support for complete smoking bans in public places was consistently higher among smokers who agreed that secondhand smoke is dangerous to non-smokers. CONCLUSIONS:Smokers in six European countries declared strong support for smoke-free policies in indoor settings and in settings with minors but low support in outdoor settings, particularly leisure facilities. More education is needed to increase the awareness about the potential exposure to secondhand smoke in specific outdoor areas.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Implementation of smoke free policies has potentially substantial effects on health by reducing secondhand smoke exposure. However little is known about whether the introduction of anti-smoking legislation translates into decreased secondhand smoke exposure. We examined whether smoking bans impact rates of secondhand smoke exposure in public places and rates of complete workplace smoking restriction.<h4>Methods</h4>Canadian Community Health Survey was used to obtain secondhand smoking exposure rates in 15 Ontario municipalities. Data analysis included descriptive summaries and 95% confidence intervals were calculated and compared across groups<h4>Results</h4>Across all studied municipalities, secondhand smoke exposure in public places decreased by 4.7% and workplace exposure decreased by 2.3% between the 2003 and 2005 survey years. The only jurisdiction to implement a full ban from no previous ban was also the only setting that experienced significant decreases in both individual exposure to secondhand smoke in a public place (-17.3%, 95% CI -22.8, -11.8) and workplace exposure (-18.1%, 95% CI -24.9, -11.3). Exposures in vehicles and homes declined in almost all settings over time.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Implementation of a full smoking ban was associated with the largest decreases in secondhand smoke exposure while partial bans and changes in existing bans had inconsistent effects. In addition to decreasing exposure in public places as would be expected from legislation, bans may have additional benefits by decreasing rates of current smokers and decreasing exposures to secondhand smoke in private settings.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:Prior 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. DESIGN:Longitudinal cohort study of Korean adult smokers. SETTING:The data were derived from three waves (2005, 2008 and 2010) of the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Korea Survey. PARTICIPANTS:The 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 MEASURES:Changes 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. RESULTS:More 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. CONCLUSIONS:Korean 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:Smoke-free legislations aim to protect non-smokers from second-hand smoke (SHS) exposure and improve population health outcomes. The aim of this study was to explore residents' perceptions to understand how people living in distinctive SES neighborhoods are differently affected by comprehensive smoke-free laws in a large city like Madrid, Spain. We conducted a qualitative project with 37 semi-structured interviews and 29 focus group discussions in three different SES neighborhoods within the city of Madrid. Constructivist grounded theory was used to analyze the transcripts. One core category arose in our analyses: Neighborhood inequalities in second-hand smoke (SHS) exposure in outdoor places. The enactment of the comprehensive smoke-free law resulted in unintended consequences that affected neighborhoods differently: relocation of smokers to outdoor setting, SHS exposure, noise disturbance and cigarette butt littering. Changes in the urban environment in the three neighborhoods resulted in the denormalization of smoking in outdoor public places, which was more clearly perceived in the high SES neighborhood. Changes in the built environment in outdoor areas of hospitality venues were reported to actually facilitate smoking. Comprehensive smoke-free laws resulted in denormalization of smoking, which might be effective in reducing SHS exposure. Extending smoking bans to outdoor areas like bus stops and hospitality venues is warranted and should include a public health inequalities perspective.
Project description:<h4>Introduction</h4>Policy-makers and practitioners need to understand characteristics associated with support for smoking restrictions to identify both potential allies and groups requiring particular support/targeted communication in the face of restrictions. Using data from prison staff and prisoners, we explored the structure and correlates of opinions relating to prison smoking bans.<h4>Methods</h4>Questionnaires were completed by staff (online, N=1271; 27% return) and prisoners (paper-based, N=2512; 34%) in all 15 Scottish prisons in 2016-17. At that time, prisoners could smoke in their own cells and during outdoor recreation; staff smoking was prohibited anywhere on prison grounds. Staff and prisoner questionnaires included identical/very similar questions about opinions on smoking in prisons and prison smoking bans, own smoking behaviour, health and sociodemographic details. We also measured in every prison fine particulate matter (PM<sub>2.5</sub>) as a proxy for secondhand smoke (SHS) levels.<h4>Results</h4>Principal components analysis identified two factors: 'Positive about bans' (higher scores among staff) and 'Bans will be difficult' (higher scores among prisoners). In multivariable analyses, 'Positive about bans' was associated with: not smoking (both staff and prisoners), better general health, more respiratory symptoms and working in an operational role among staff; and no asthma, more sensory symptoms, higher educational level and status/release date among prisoners. 'Bans will be difficult' was associated with: fewer sensory symptoms and lower prison SHS levels among staff and being a smoker among prisoners. In smoker-only analyses, heavier smokers were less positive about bans and more likely to believe bans will be difficult.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Results suggest it is possible to be positive about prison smoking bans whilst also recognising and/or concerned about potential operational difficulties, and that these opinions are associated with several characteristics additional to smoker status. Support for future prison bans may be stronger if staff have access to objective SHS exposure measures.
Project description:BACKGROUND: Germany's 16 states regulate smoking differently within health protection principles laid down in the federal law. All state smoke-free laws in Germany have undergone at least one change since taking effect. METHODS: We systematically review federal and state laws regulating smoking, as well as petitions, popular initiatives and referenda that aimed at changing statutory smoking bans. Data generated through the systematic review were correlated with state smoking rates. RESULTS: The protection from the dangers of secondhand smoke is the primary motive for smoking bans in Germany. The first smoke-free laws affecting smoking in pubs, restaurants and several other public places were introduced in 2007. In 2008, the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany ruled in a leading decision on the smoke-free laws of two states that some common smoking ban exemptions of the introduced smoke-free laws violate the basic right to freely exercise a profession and mandated revisions. All states but Bavaria and Saarland, whose smoking bans were more and less comprehensive than those judged by the constitutional court, respectively, needed to change the smoking ban exemptions to reconcile their smoke-free laws with the constitution. Direct democracy initiatives to change smoking bans were only successful in Bavaria in 2010, but a total of 15 initiatives by citizens' or interest groups attempted to influence non-smokers protection legislation through direct democratic procedures. Early ratification of a smoking ban in a federal state correlates with a higher reduction in the smoking rate from 2005 to 2009 (Spearman's ? = 0.51, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The federal government structure and direct democratic participation in smoke-free legislation in Germany has produced a diversity of local smoking bans and exemptions.
Project description:Smoking restrictions in recreational settings are established to promote anti-smoking norms and reduce exposure to secondhand smoke. Outdoor smoke-free policies are increasing, yet little is known about the perceptions of such restrictions.Data were collected from a population-based sample of young adults (n=2289) in upper Midwestern United States. Cross-sectional multivariate logistic regression was used to assess predictors of the perceived difficulty to smoke in outdoor park areas.Living in an area with a smoke-free park policy was associated with a 1.4 times higher odds of perceiving difficulty to smoke compared to those living in an area without such a policy, after controlling for past month smoking, physical activity, age, and gender. Both smokers and non-smokers living in an area with a smoke-free park policy had higher odds of perceiving difficulty to smoking in park areas (OR=1.6 and 1.3 respectively) compared to smokers and non-smokers living in areas without such policies.Banning smoking in park areas was associated with a heightened perception of difficulty in smoking for young adult smokers and non-smokers.
Project description:OBJECTIVES:To examine trends in smoking prevalence in key venues (workplaces, restaurants, bars) and in public support for comprehensive smoke-free laws, with comparisons between cities and rural areas in China. DESIGN:Data are from Waves 3-5 (2009-2015) of the International Tobacco Control (ITC) China Survey, a cohort survey of smokers and non-smokers. Logistic regression analyses employing generalised estimating equations assessed changes in smoking prevalence and support for smoke-free laws over time; specific tests assessed whether partial smoking bans implemented in three cities between Waves 3 and 4 had greater impact. SETTING:Face-to-face surveys were conducted in seven cities (Beijing, Changsha, Guangzhou, Kunming, Shanghai, Shenyang and Yinchuan) and five rural areas (Changzhi, Huzhou, Tongren, Yichun and Xining). PARTICIPANTS:In each survey location at each wave, a representative sample of approximately 800 smokers and 200 non-smokers (aged 18+) were selected using a multistage cluster sampling design. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Prevalence of smoking (whether respondents noticed smoking inside restaurants, bars and workplaces); smoking rules inside these venues; and support for complete smoking bans in these venues. RESULTS:Although smoking prevalence decreased and support increased over time, neither trend was greater in cities that implemented partial smoke-free laws. Smoking was higher in rural than urban workplaces (62% vs 44%, p<0.01), but was equally high in all restaurants and bars. There were generally no differences in secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure between smokers and non-smokers except in rural workplaces (74% vs 58%, p<0.05). Support for comprehensive bans was equally high across locations. CONCLUSIONS:Partial laws have had no effect on reducing SHS in China. There is an urgent need for comprehensive smoke-free laws to protect the public from exposure to deadly tobacco smoke in both urban and rural areas. The high support among Chinese smokers for such a law demonstrates that public support is not a barrier for action.
Project description:This article focuses on the impact of COVID-19 on smoking and smoking cessation behaviours and support for smoke-free zones in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. A pre-tested structured survey was distributed by email in October-November 2020 to students and staff at the University of Jeddah. Responses were analysed using descriptive statistics with summative content analysis of open text. Participants providing open text comments (<i>n</i> = 374/666; 56.4%) were non-smokers (<i>n</i> = 293; 78.3%), former smokers (<i>n</i> = 26; 7.0%) and current smokers (<i>n</i> = 55; 14.7%). Some had household members (<i>n</i> = 220; 58.8%) and friends who smoke (<i>n</i> = 198; 52.9%) plus daily exposure to secondhand smoke at home (<i>n</i> = 125; 33.4%). There was an awareness during COVID-19 of: smoking inside cafes/restaurants and other indoor and outdoor public places; exposure to warnings in the media both against and promoting smoking; widespread support for smoke-free zones. Smokers plans for accessing smoking cessation support are inconsistent with retrospective reports. Many express positivity highlighting reductions in smoking but there were also negative reports of increased smoking. The COVID-19 pandemic has affected every aspect of society worldwide. People have been at home more with restricted freedom of movement and limitations on social liberty. These individual accounts can help to focus evidence-based smoking prevention and cessation programmes during and post-COVID-19.
Project description:<h4>Objective</h4>Due to partial or poorly enforced restrictions secondhand tobacco smoke (SHS) is still present in outdoor hospitality venues in many European countries. This study aimed to assess SHS concentrations in outdoor hospitality venues across Europe and identify contextual exposure determinants.<h4>Methods</h4>Cross-sectional study. We measured airborne nicotine and evidence of tobacco use in terraces of bars, cafeterias, and pubs from 11 European countries in 2017-2018. Sites were selected considering area-level socioeconomic indicators and half were visited during nighttime. We noted the smell of smoke, presence of smokers, cigarette butts, ashtrays, and number of physical covers. Contextual determinants included national smoke-free policies for the hospitality sector, the Tobacco Control Scale score (2016), and the national smoking prevalence (2017-2018). We computed medians and interquartile ranges (IQR) of nicotine concentrations and used multivariate analyses to characterize the exposure determinants.<h4>Results</h4>Nicotine was present in 93.6% of the 220 sites explored. Overall concentrations were 0.85 (IQR:0.30-3.74) μg/m<sup>3</sup> and increased during nighttime (1.45 IQR:0.65-4.79 μg/m<sup>3</sup>), in enclosed venues (2.97 IQR:0.80-5.80 μg/m<sup>3</sup>), in venues with more than two smokers (2.79 IQR:1.03-6.30 μg/m<sup>3</sup>), in venues in countries with total indoor smoking bans (1.20 IQR:0.47-4.85 μg/m<sup>3</sup>), and in venues in countries with higher smoking prevalence (1.32 IQR:0.49-5.34 μg/m<sup>3</sup>). In multivariate analyses, nicotine concentrations were also positively associated with the observed number of cigarette butts. In venues with more than two smokers, SHS levels did not significantly vary with the venues' degree of enclosure.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Our results suggest that current restrictions in outdoor hospitality venues across Europe have a limited protective effect and justify the adoption of total smoking bans in outdoor areas of hospitality venues.
Project description:Smoke-free policies effectively reduce secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure among non-smokers, and reduce consumption, encourage quit attempts, and minimize relapse to smoking among smokers. Such policies are uncommon in permanent supportive housing (PSH) for formerly homeless individuals. In this study, we collaborated with a PSH provider in San Diego, California to assess a smoke-free policy that restricted indoor smoking. Between August and November 2015, residents completed a pre-policy questionnaire on attitudes toward smoke-free policies and exposure to secondhand smoke, and then 7-9 months after policy implementation residents were re-surveyed. At follow-up, there was a 59.7% reduction in indoor smoking. The proportion of residents who identified as current smokers reduced by 13% (95% CI: -38, 10.2). The proportion of residents who reported never smelling SHS indoors (apartment 24.2%, 95% CI: 4.2, 44.1; shared areas 17.2%, 95% CI: 1.7, 32.7); in outdoor areas next to the living unit (porches or patio 56.7%, 95% CI: 40.7, 72.8); and in other outdoor areas (parking lot 28.6%, 95% CI: 8.3, 48.9) was lower post-policy compared with pre-policy. Overall, resident support increased by 18.7%; however, the greatest increase in support occurred among current smokers (from 14.8 to 37.5%). Fewer current smokers reported that the policy would enable cessation at post-policy compared to pre-policy. Our findings demonstrate the feasibility of implementing smoke-free policies in PSH for formerly homeless adults. However, policy alone appears insufficient to trigger change in smoking behavior, highlighting the need for additional cessation resources to facilitate quitting.