INTRODUCTION: Smoke-free policies are effective in eliminating health hazards that can lead to chronic diseases and premature death. How hospitality businesses experience clean indoor air policies may provide leverage in States that have not adopted such policies. This study assessed whether North Carolina restaurants and bars receive complaints and/or experience benefits five years after implementation of the State's smoke-free law. METHODS: A 2015 mail survey was used to assess problems, benefits, and voluntary policies (i.e., policies related to the use of electronic cigarettes indoors and outside smoke-free seating areas) among restaurant and bar owners/managers. The survey yielded 135 responses for a response rate of 20.3%. RESULTS: The two most frequently selected benefits among respondents were customers breathing less tobacco smoke (65.2%) and fewer complaints about secondhand smoke (58.5%). The majority of restaurants (79.7%) and bars (71.4%) reported experiencing at least one benefit from the law. Restaurants were significantly more likely than bars to restrict the use of electronic cigarettes inside. No significant difference was found between restaurants and bars in smoke-free outdoor customer areas. Bars were more likely to report problems with the smoke-free law (e.g. lack of outdoor space for smoking, compliance issues). CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals successes of North Carolina's smoke-free law. The majority of respondents reported experiencing at least one benefit of the law and some reported that they had implemented additional voluntary policies. Learning more about how hospitality businesses experience smoke-free laws can help other states and communities deal with similar policy changes in the future.
INTRODUCTION: Smoke-free policies are effective in eliminating health hazards that can lead to chronic diseases and premature death. How hospitality businesses experience clean indoor air policies may provide leverage in States that have not adopted such policies. This study assessed whether North Carolina restaurants and bars receive complaints and/or experience benefits five years after implementation of the State's smoke-free law. METHODS: A 2015 mail survey was used to assess problems, benefits, and voluntary policies (i.e., policies related to the use of electronic cigarettes indoors and outside smoke-free seating areas) among restaurant and bar owners/managers. The survey yielded 135 responses for a response rate of 20.3%. RESULTS: The two most frequently selected benefits among respondents were customers breathing less tobacco smoke (65.2%) and fewer complaints about secondhand smoke (58.5%). The majority of restaurants (79.7%) and bars (71.4%) reported experiencing at least one benefit from the law. Restaurants were significantly more likely than bars to restrict the use of electronic cigarettes inside. No significant difference was found between restaurants and bars in smoke-free outdoor customer areas. Bars were more likely to report problems with the smoke-free law (e.g. lack of outdoor space for smoking, compliance issues). CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals successes of North Carolina's smoke-free law. The majority of respondents reported experiencing at least one benefit of the law and some reported that they had implemented additional voluntary policies. Learning more about how hospitality businesses experience smoke-free laws can help other states and communities deal with similar policy changes in the future.
Authors: Hao Tang; David W Cowling; Jon C Lloyd; Todd Rogers; Kristi L Koumjian; Colleen M Stevens; Dileep G Bal Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: R Borland; H-H Yong; M Siahpush; A Hyland; S Campbell; G Hastings; K M Cummings; G T Fong Journal: Tob Control Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: S Sean Hu; Linda Neff; Israel T Agaku; Shanna Cox; Hannah R Day; Enver Holder-Hayes; Brian A King Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2016-07-15 Impact factor: 17.586
Authors: Wolfgang Schober; Katalin Szendrei; Wolfgang Matzen; Helga Osiander-Fuchs; Dieter Heitmann; Thomas Schettgen; Rudolf A Jörres; Hermann Fromme Journal: Int J Hyg Environ Health Date: 2013-12-06 Impact factor: 5.840
Authors: Kanae Bekki; Shigehisa Uchiyama; Kazushi Ohta; Yohei Inaba; Hideki Nakagome; Naoki Kunugita Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2014-10-28 Impact factor: 3.390