Michelle C Kegler1, Regine Haardӧrfer2, Carla Berg2, Cam Escoffery2, Lucja Bundy2, Rebecca Williams3, Patricia Dolan Mullen4. 1. Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; mkegler@emory.edu. 2. Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; 3. Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC; 4. Center for Health Promotion and Prevention Research, Department of Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences, University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, TX.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Smoke-free homes reduce exposure to secondhand smoke, contribute to lower levels of consumption, and help smokers to quit. Even when home smoking rules are established however, they may not be consistently enforced. METHODS: This study uses data from a randomized controlled trial of a brief intervention to create smoke-free homes among callers to the United Way of Greater Atlanta 2-1-1. Participants with partial or full home smoking bans at 6-month follow-up were asked about enforcement challenges, rooms where smoking occurred, and exceptions to the rules. Air nicotine monitors were placed in a subset of homes. RESULTS:Participants (n = 286) were mostly female (84.6%) and African American (84.9%). Most were smokers (79.0%) and reported at least half of their friends and relatives smoked (63.3%). Among those with a full ban, 4.3% reported their rules were broken very often whereas 52.6% stated they were never broken. Bad weather and parties were the most common exceptions to rules. Among nonsmokers with full bans, 16% reported exposure to secondhand smoke in the home 1-3 days in the past week. In multivariate analyses, having a partial ban, being a nonsmoker, and living with three or more smokers predicted higher levels of enforcement challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest the majority of households with newly adopted smoke-free rules had no or rare enforcement challenges, but about one-fifth reported their rules were broken sometimes or very often. Interventions to create smoke-free homes should address enforcement challenges as newly adopted rules may be fragile in some households. IMPLICATIONS: Interventions that promote smoke-free homes should address enforcement challenges.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: Smoke-free homes reduce exposure to secondhand smoke, contribute to lower levels of consumption, and help smokers to quit. Even when home smoking rules are established however, they may not be consistently enforced. METHODS: This study uses data from a randomized controlled trial of a brief intervention to create smoke-free homes among callers to the United Way of Greater Atlanta 2-1-1. Participants with partial or full home smoking bans at 6-month follow-up were asked about enforcement challenges, rooms where smoking occurred, and exceptions to the rules. Air nicotine monitors were placed in a subset of homes. RESULTS:Participants (n = 286) were mostly female (84.6%) and African American (84.9%). Most were smokers (79.0%) and reported at least half of their friends and relatives smoked (63.3%). Among those with a full ban, 4.3% reported their rules were broken very often whereas 52.6% stated they were never broken. Bad weather and parties were the most common exceptions to rules. Among nonsmokers with full bans, 16% reported exposure to secondhand smoke in the home 1-3 days in the past week. In multivariate analyses, having a partial ban, being a nonsmoker, and living with three or more smokers predicted higher levels of enforcement challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest the majority of households with newly adopted smoke-free rules had no or rare enforcement challenges, but about one-fifth reported their rules were broken sometimes or very often. Interventions to create smoke-free homes should address enforcement challenges as newly adopted rules may be fragile in some households. IMPLICATIONS: Interventions that promote smoke-free homes should address enforcement challenges.
Authors: K S Hudmon; P D Mullen; L Nicol; S K Hammond; M M Sockrider; T Sajak; J Thompson Journal: Toxicol Ind Health Date: 1997 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.273
Authors: Erika Avila-Tang; Jessica L Elf; K Michael Cummings; Geoffrey T Fong; Melbourne F Hovell; Jonathan D Klein; Robert McMillen; Jonathan P Winickoff; Jonathan M Samet Journal: Tob Control Date: 2012-09-04 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Michelle C Kegler; Katherine Anderson; Lucja T Bundy; Deana Knauf; June Halfacre; Cam Escoffery; Andre Cramblit; Patricia Henderson Journal: J Community Health Date: 2019-08
Authors: Shaheen Shiraz Kurani; Michelle A Lampman; Shealeigh A Funni; Rachel E Giblon; Jonathan W Inselman; Nilay D Shah; Summer Allen; David Rushlow; Rozalina G McCoy Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-12-01
Authors: Lara S Savas; Patricia Dolan Mullen; Melbourne F Hovell; Cam Escoffrey; Maria E Fernandez; Jennifer A Jones; Jazmine Cavazos; Jo Ann A Gutierrez Monroy; Michelle C Kegler Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2017-11-07 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Michael J Parks; Michelle C Kegler; John H Kingsbury; Iris W Borowsky Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-09-17 Impact factor: 3.390