Dataset Information

Strict smoke-free home policies among smoking parents in pediatric settings.

ABSTRACT: To examine strict smoke-free home policies among smoking parents assessed in pediatric offices.We analyzed baseline parental survey data from 10 control practices in a national trial of pediatric office-based tobacco control interventions (Clinical Effort Against Secondhand Smoke Exposure, CEASE). We used logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations to examine factors associated with strict smoke-free home policies.Subjects were 952 parents who were current smokers. Just over half (54.3%) reported strict smoke-free home policies. Few reported being asked (19.9%) or advised (17.1%) regarding policies by pediatricians. Factors associated with higher odds of policies were child 5 years or younger (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.53, 3.86), nonblack race/ethnicity (aORs 2.17-2.60, 95% CIs 1.25-5.00), non-Medicaid (HMO/private (aOR 1.84, 95% CI 1.31, 2.58); self-pay/other aOR 1.76, 95% CI 1.12, 2.78); well-child versus sick child visit (aOR 1.61, 95% CI 1.11, 2.34), fewer than 10 cigarettes per day (aOR 1.80, 95% CI 1.31, 2.47), no other home smokers (aOR 1.68, 95% CI 1.26, 2.25), only father smoking (aOR 1.73, 95% CI 1.06, 2.83), and strict smoke-free car policy (aOR 3.51, 95% CI 2.19, 5.64).Nearly half of smoking parents did not have strict smoke-free home policies. Parents were less likely to report policies if they were heavier smokers, black, living with other smokers, or attending a sick child visit; if they did not have a young child or smoke-free car policy; if they had a child on Medicaid; and if anyone other than only the father smoked. Few pediatricians addressed or recommended strict smoke-free home policies in an office visit. The pediatric office encounter represents a currently missed opportunity to intervene regarding smoke-free homes, particularly for high-risk groups.

SUBMITTER: Ossip DJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4046861 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Nov-Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Strict smoke-free home policies among smoking parents in pediatric settings.

Ossip Deborah J DJ Chang Yuchiao Y Nabi-Burza Emara E Drehmer Jeremy J Finch Stacia S Hipple Bethany B Rigotti Nancy A NA Klein Jonathan D JD Winickoff Jonathan P JP

Academic pediatrics 20131101 6

<h4>Objective</h4>To examine strict smoke-free home policies among smoking parents assessed in pediatric offices.<h4>Methods</h4>We analyzed baseline parental survey data from 10 control practices in a national trial of pediatric office-based tobacco control interventions (Clinical Effort Against Secondhand Smoke Exposure, CEASE). We used logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations to examine factors associated with strict smoke-free home policies.<h4>Results</h4>Subjects we ...[more]

PMID: 24238677

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe workplace and home are sources of exposure to secondhand smoke, a serious health hazard for nonsmoking adults and children. Smoke-free workplace policies and home rules protect nonsmoking individuals from secondhand smoke and help individuals who smoke to quit smoking. However, estimated population coverages of smoke-free workplace policies and home rules are not typically available at small geographic levels such as counties. Model-based small-area estimation techniques are needed to produce such estimates.MethodsSelf-reported smoke-free workplace policies and home rules data came from the 2014-2015 Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey. County-level design-based estimates of the two measures were computed and linked to county-level relevant covariates obtained from external sources. Hierarchical Bayesian models were then built and implemented through Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods.ResultsModel-based estimates of smoke-free workplace policies and home rules were produced for 3134 (of 3143) US counties. In 2014-2015, nearly 80% of US adult workers were covered by smoke-free workplace policies, and more than 85% of US adults were covered by smoke-free home rules. We found large variations within and between states in the coverage of smoke-free workplace policies and home rules.ConclusionsThe small-area modeling approach efficiently reduced the variability that was attributable to small sample size in the direct estimates for counties with data and predicted estimates for counties without data by borrowing strength from covariates and other counties with similar profiles. The county-level modeled estimates can serve as a useful resource for tobacco control research and intervention.ImplicationsDetailed county- and state-level estimates of smoke-free workplace policies and home rules can help identify coverage disparities and differential impact of smoke-free legislation and related social norms. Moreover, this estimation framework can be useful for modeling different tobacco control variables and applied elsewhere, for example, to other behavioral, policy, or health related topics.

Project description:The increasing denormalization of smoking by tobacco control policies and a normative smoke-free climate may shift power towards adolescent non-smokers. It is unclear, however, how common stigmatization of smokers is among adolescents or how stigmatization relates to the denormalization of smoking in their school and social environment. This paper aims to measure (1) whether stigmatization among European adolescents varies according to smoking status and socioeconomic position (SES), and (2) whether stigmatization is greater in school environments in which smoking is denormalized (i.e. those with low smoking rates and strong school tobacco policies). Data on 12,991 adolescents were collected in 55 schools in seven European countries (SILNE R-survey, 2016/17). We applied Stuber's adapted scale of perceived stereotyping and discrimination towards smokers to smoking status and five variables indicating a power shift towards non-smokers: the school's tobacco control policy (STP) score, the percentage of adolescents in the school who smoke, parents' level of education, students' academic performance, and the percentage of their friends who smoke. Multilevel regressions were applied to the global score for perceived stigmatization. Discrimination against smokers and stereotyping of smokers were frequently reported. Smokers reported less 'perceived stigmatization of smoking' than non-smokers (Beta = -0.146, p < 0.001). High-SES students reported stereotyping and discrimination more frequently than lower-SES students. The perception of stigmatization was lower among students whose academic performance was poor (Beta = -0.070, p < 0.001) and among those who had friends who smoked (Beta = -0.141, p < 0.001). Stigmatization was lower in schools with greater exposure to smoking and was not associated with the school's STP score. Perceived stigmatization of smoking is common among European adolescents. Smokers themselves, however, perceive stigmatization less often than non-smokers. Strong school tobacco policies do not increase stigmatization, but a social environment that is permissive of smoking decreases perceived stigmatization.

Project description:Background People 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. Aim This study explored smoking in acute metal health wards using data emerging from a large sociological study on modern acute psychiatric units. Methods Eighty-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. Results Although 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. Conclusion Psychiatric 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.

Dataset Information

Strict smoke-free home policies among smoking parents in pediatric settings.

Publications

Strict smoke-free home policies among smoking parents in pediatric settings.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets