Impact of smoke-free ordinance strength on smoking prevalence and lung cancer incidence.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Smoke-free ordinances (SFO) have been shown to be effective public health interventions, but there is limited data on the impact SFO on lung cancer outcomes. We explored the effect of county-level SFO strength with smoking prevalence and lung cancer incidence in Indiana.Methods
We obtained county-level lung cancer incidence from the Indiana State Cancer Registry and county-level characteristics from the Indiana Tobacco Prevention and Cessation Commission's policy database between 1995 and 2016. Using generalized estimating equations, we performed multivariable analyses of smoking prevalence and age-adjusted lung cancer rates with respect to the strength of smoke-free ordinances at the county level over time.Results
Of Indiana's 92 counties, 24 had a SFO by 2011. In 2012, Indiana enacted a state-wide SFO enforcing at least moderate level SFO protection. Mean age-adjusted lung cancer incidence per year was 76.8 per 100,000 population and mean smoking prevalence per year was 25% during the study period. Counties with comprehensive or moderate SFO had a smoking prevalence 1.2% (95% CI [-1.88, -0.52]) lower compared with counties with weak or no SFO. Counties that had comprehensive or moderate SFO also had an 8.4 (95% CI [-11.5, -5.3]) decrease in new lung cancer diagnosis per 100,000 population per year compared with counties that had weak or no SFO.Conclusion
Counties with stronger smoke-free air ordinances were associated with decreased smoking prevalence and fewer new lung cancer cases per year. Strengthening SFO is paramount to decreasing lung cancer incidence.
SUBMITTER: Nguyen RH
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8051804 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Smoking prevention should be a primary public health priority for all governments, and effective preventive policies have been identified for decades. The heterogeneity of smoking prevalence between European Union (EU) Member States therefore reflects, at least in part, a failure by governments to prioritise public health over tobacco industry or possibly other financial interests, and hence potentially government corruption. The aims of this study were to test the hypothesis that smoking prevalence is higher in countries with high levels of public sector corruption, and explore the ecological association between smoking prevalence and a range of other national characteristics in current EU Member States.Ecological data from 27 EU Member States were used to estimate univariate and multivariate correlations between smoking prevalence and the Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index, and a range of other national characteristics including economic development, social inclusion, quality of life and importance of religion. We also explored the association between the Corruption Perceptions Index and measures of the extent to which smoke-free policies have been enacted and are enforced.In univariate analysis, smoking prevalence was significantly higher in countries with higher scores for corruption, material deprivation, and gender inequality; and lower in countries with higher per capita Gross Domestic Product, social spending, life satisfaction and human development scores. In multivariate analysis, only the corruption perception index was independently related to smoking prevalence. Exposure to tobacco smoke in the workplace was also correlated with corruption, independently from smoking prevalence, but not with the measures of national smoke-free policy implementation.Corruption appears to be an important risk factor for failure of national tobacco control activity in EU countries, and the extent to which key tobacco control policies have been implemented. Further research is needed to assess the causal relationships involved.
| S-EPMC3166128 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The prevalence of smokers is a major driver of lung cancer incidence in a population, though the "exposure-lag" effects are ill-defined. Here we present a multi-country ecological modelling study using a 30-year smoking prevalence history to quantify the exposure-lag response. To model the temporal dependency between smoking prevalence and lung cancer incidence, we used a distributed lag non-linear model (DLNM), controlling for gender, age group, country, outcome year, and population at risk, and presented the effects as the incidence rate ratio (IRR) and cumulative incidence rate ratio (IRRcum). The exposure-response varied by lag period, whilst the lag-response varied according to the magnitude and direction of changes in smoking prevalence in the population. For the cumulative lag-response, increments above and below the reference level was associated with an increased and decreased IRRcum respectively, with the magnitude of the effect varying across the lag period. Though caution should be exercised in interpretation of the IRR and IRRcum estimates reported herein, we hope our work constitutes a preliminary step towards providing policy makers with meaningful indicators to inform national screening programme developments. To that end, we have implemented our statistical model a shiny app and provide an example of its use.
| S-EPMC8280159 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of this study was to assess the effect of a creating a smoke-free home (SFH) on cessation and reduction of cigarette smoking on low-income smokers. This secondary data analysis uses data from study participants who were originally recruited through 2-1-1 information and referral call centers in Atlanta (Georgia, 2013), North Carolina (2014) and the Texas Gulf Coast (2015) across three randomized controlled trials testing an intervention aimed at creating SFHs, pooling data from 941 smokers. Participants who reported adopting a SFH were more likely to report quitting smoking than those who did not adopt a SFH. This was true at 3-month follow-up and even more pronounced at 6-month follow-up and persisted when considering only those who consistently reported no smoking at 3 and 6 months. Among those who did not stop smoking, the number of cigarettes per day declined significantly more and quit attempts were more frequent for those who created a SFH compared with those who did not. Findings suggest that creating a SFH facilitates cessation, reduces cigarette consumption and increases quit attempts. Future studies should assess the long-term impact of SFHs on sustaining cessation.
| S-EPMC6658707 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBoth active and passive cigarette smoking have previously been associated with orofacial cleft aetiology. We aimed to analyse the impact of declining active smoking prevalence and the implementation of smoke-free legislation on the incidence of children born with a cleft lip and/or palate within the United Kingdom.Methods and findingsWe conducted regression analysis using national administrative data in the United Kingdom between 2000-2018. The main outcome measure was orofacial cleft incidence, reported annually for England, Wales and Northern Ireland and separately for Scotland. First, we conducted an ecological study with longitudinal time-series analysis using smoking prevalence data for females over 16 years of age. Second, we used a natural experiment design with interrupted time-series analysis to assess the impact of smoke-free legislation. Over the study period, the annual incidence of orofacial cleft per 10,000 live births ranged from 14.2-16.2 in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and 13.4-18.8 in Scotland. The proportion of active smokers amongst females in the United Kingdom declined by 37% during the study period. Adjusted regression analysis did not show a correlation between the proportion of active smokers and orofacial cleft incidence in either dataset, although we were unable to exclude a modest effect of the magnitude seen in individual-level observational studies. The data in England, Wales and Northern Ireland suggested an 8% reduction in orofacial cleft incidence (RR 0.92, 95%CI 0.85 to 0.99; P = 0.024) following the implementation of smoke-free legislation. In Scotland, there was weak evidence for an increase in orofacial cleft incidence following smoke-free legislation (RR 1.16, 95%CI 0.94 to 1.44; P = 0.173).ConclusionsThese two ecological studies offer a novel insight into the influence of smoking in orofacial cleft aetiology, adding to the evidence base from individual-level studies. Our results suggest that smoke-free legislation may have reduced orofacial cleft incidence in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
| S-EPMC8612573 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC8592473 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionOn September 2, 2019, Rotterdam's first inner-city outdoor smoke-free zone encompassing the Erasmus MC, a large university hospital in the Netherlands, the Erasmiaans high school, the Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences and the public road in between, was implemented.Aims and methodsWe aimed to assess spatiotemporal patterning of smoking before and after implementation of this outdoor smoke-free zone. We performed a before-after observational field study. We systematically observed the number of smokers, and their locations and characteristics over 37 days before and after implementation of the smoke-free zone.ResultsBefore implementation of the smoke-free zone, 4098 people smoked in the area every weekday during working hours. After implementation, the daily number of smokers was 2241, a 45% reduction (p = .007). There was an increase of 432 smokers per day near and just outside the borders of the zone. At baseline, 31% of the smokers were categorized as employee, 22% as student and 3% as patient. Following implementation of the smoke-free zone, the largest decreases in smokers were observed among employees (-67%, p value .004) and patients (-70%, p value .049). Before and after implementation, 21 and 20 smokers were visibly addressed and asked to smoke elsewhere.ConclusionsImplementation of an inner-city smoke-free zone was associated with a substantial decline in the number of smokers in the zone and an overall reduction of smoking in the larger area. Further research should focus on optimizing implementation of and compliance with outdoor smoke-free zones.ImplicationsA smoke-free outdoor policy has the potential to denormalize and discourage smoking, support smokers who want to quit, and to protect people from secondhand smoke exposure. Implementation of an inner-city smoke-free zone encompassing a large tertiary hospital and two educational institutions was associated with a substantial decline in the number of smokers in the zone, as well as in the larger area. Voluntary outdoor smoke-free zones can help reduce the number of smokers in the area and protect people from secondhand smoke. There is a need to explore effectiveness of additional measures to further improve compliance.
| S-EPMC8570668 | biostudies-literature
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 (n = 374/666; 56.4%) were non-smokers (n = 293; 78.3%), former smokers (n = 26; 7.0%) and current smokers (n = 55; 14.7%). Some had household members (n = 220; 58.8%) and friends who smoke (n = 198; 52.9%) plus daily exposure to secondhand smoke at home (n = 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.
| S-EPMC8297188 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Smoke-free air laws have been implemented in many Kentucky communities to protect the public from the harmful effects of secondhand smoke exposure. The impact of different strengths of smoke-free air laws on indoor air quality was assessed. METHODS:Indoor air quality in hospitality venues was assessed in seven communities before and after comprehensive smoke-free air laws and in two communities only after partial smoke-free air laws. One community was measured three times: before any smoke-free air law, after the initial partial law, and after the law was strengthened to cover all workplaces and public places with few exemptions. Real-time measurements of particulate matters with 2.5 mum aerodynamic diameter or smaller (PM(2.5)) were obtained. RESULTS:When comprehensive smoke-free air laws were implemented, indoor PM(2.5) concentrations decreased significantly from 161 to 20 microg/m3. In one community that implemented a comprehensive smoke-free law after initially passing a partial law, indoor PM(2.5) concentrations were 304 microg/m3 before the law, 338 microg/m3 after the partial law, and 9 microg/m3 after the comprehensive law. DISCUSSION:The study clearly demonstrated that partial smoke-free air laws do not improve indoor air quality. A significant linear trend indicated that PM(2.5) levels in the establishments decreased with fewer numbers of burning cigarettes. Only comprehensive smoke-free air laws are effective in reducing indoor air pollution from secondhand tobacco smoke.
| S-EPMC2722240 | biostudies-other
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.
| S-EPMC7899270 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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.
| S-EPMC4046861 | biostudies-literature