Predictors of Voluntary Home-Smoking Restrictions and Associations with an Objective Measure of In-Home Smoking among Subsidized Housing Tenants

Abstract

Purpose.

Examine predictors of voluntary home-smoking restrictions (HSRs) and associations with an objective measure of in-home smoking.

Design.

Cross-sectional.

Setting.

Publicly subsidized multiunit housing units managed by private company in Columbus, Ohio, without a smoke-free housing policy.

Subjects.

Probability sample of primary leaseholders (N = 301, 64% response rate).

Measures.

Self-reported knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors collected during face-to-face survey in fall 2011, including individual (e.g., knowledge of health effects), social (e.g., number of friends who smoke), and environmental (e.g., safety) factors hypothesized to be related to having HSRs. Surface nicotine concentration (μg/m²) based on samples collected from wood surface in respondents' living rooms (n = 279).

Analysis.

Multiple linear and logistic regression were used to identify factors associated with having HSRs and with indoor surface nicotine concentrations.

Results.

Fewer than one-third (29.2%) of tenants had complete HSRs, while more than half (55.8%) had partial restrictions. Several individual and social factors, but no environmental/community factors, were associated with having HSRs. Type of HSRs (p < .001) and smoking status (p < .001) were independently associated with mean surface nicotine concentrations.

Conclusion.

Few subsidized housing tenants voluntarily limit in-home smoking. Partial restrictions could be considered as a harm reduction strategy but may be less effective among smokers. Strategies to change social norms are also needed to modify in-home smoking behavior among subsidized housing tenants.

Keywords

Secondhand Smoke Environmental Exposure Poverty Health Behavior Prevention Research Manuscript format: research Research purpose: modeling/relationship testing Study design: nonexperimental Outcome measure: behavioral,environmental Setting: local community Health focus: tobacco control Strategy: policy,culture change Target population age: adults Target population circumstances: education/income level geographic location and race/ethnicity

References

US Dept of Health and Human Services . The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke. Atlanta, Ga: US Dept of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Coordinating Center for Health Promotion, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health; 2006.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . Vital signs: Nonsmokers' exposure to secondhand smoke—United States, 1999–2008. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2010;59:1141–1146.

Klepeis

Nelson

Ott

. The national human activity pattern survey (NHAPS): A resource for assessing exposure to environmental pollutants. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol. 2001;11:231–252.

Cheng

Glantz

Lightwood

. Association between smokefree laws and voluntary smokefree-home rules. Am J Prev Med. 2011;41:566–572.

Spencer

Blackburn

Bonas

. Parent reported home smoking bans and toddler (18–30 month) smoke exposure: A cross-sectional survey. Arch Dis Child. 2005;90:670–674.

Gonzales

Malcoe

Kegler

Espinoza

. Prevalence and predictors of home and automobile smoking bans and child environmental tobacco smoke exposure: A cross-sectional study of US- and Mexico-born Hispanic women with young children. BMC Public Health. 2006;6:265–274.

Biener

Cullen

Hammond

. Household smoking restrictions and adolescents' exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. Prev Med. 1997;26:358–363.

Wamboldt

Balkissoon

Rankin

. Correlates of household smoking bans in low-income families of children with and without asthma. Fam Process. 2008;47:81–94.

Hyland

Higbee

Travers

. Smoke-free homes and smoking cessation and relapse in a longitudinal population of adults. Nicotine Tob Res. 2009;11:614–618.

10.

Borland

Yong

Cummings

. Determinants and consequences of smoke-free homes: Findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) four country survey. Tob Control. 2006;15(suppl 3):S42–S50.

11.

Messer

Mills

White

Pierce

. The effect of smoke-free homes on smoking behavior in the US. Am J Prev Med. 2008;35:210–216.

12.

Shields

. Smoking bans: Influence on smoking prevalence. Health Rep. 2007;18:9–24.

13.

Mills

Messer

Gilpin

Pierce

. The effect of smoke-free homes on adult smoking behavior: A review. Nicotine Tob Res. 2009;11:1131–1141.

14.

Zhang

Martinez-Donate

Kuo

. Trends in home smoking bans in the USA, 1995–2007: Prevalence, discrepancies and disparities. Tob Control. 2012;21:330–336.

15.

Gilpin

White

Farkas

Pierce

. Home smoking restrictions: Which smokers have them and how they are associated with smoking behavior. Nicotine Tob Res. 1999;1:152–161.

16.

King

Cummings

Mahoney

. Multiunit housing residents' experiences and attitudes toward smoke-free policies. Nicotine Tob Res. 2010;12:598–605.

17.

Winickoff

Friebely

Tanski

. Beliefs about the health effects of “thirdhand” smoke and home smoking bans. Pediatrics. 2009;123:e74–e79.

18.

Norman

Ribisl

Howard-Pitney

Howard

. Smoking bans in the home and car: Do those who really need them have them? Prev Med. 1999;29:581–589.

19.

Kegler

Escoffery

Groff

. A qualitative study of how families decide to adopt household smoking restrictions. Fam Community Health. 2007;30:328–341.

20.

Halterman

Fagnano

Conn

Szilagyi

. Do parents of urban children with persistent asthma ban smoking in their homes and cars? Ambul Pediatr. 2006;6:115–119.

21.

Halterman

Conn

Hernandez

Tanski

. Parent knowledge, attitudes, and household practices regarding SHS exposure: A case-control study of urban children with and without asthma. Clin Pediatr. 2010;49:782–789.

22.

Kim

Aung

Berkeley

. Measurement of nicotine in household dust. Environ Res. 2008;108:289–293.

23.

Matt

Quintana

Zakarian

. When smokers move out and non-smokers move in: Residential thirdhand smoke pollution and exposure. Tob Control. 2011;20:e1–e8.

24.

Matt

Quintana

Hovell

. Households contaminated by environmental tobacco smoke: Sources of infant exposures. Tob Control. 2004;13:29–37.

25.

Singer

Hodgson

Nazaroff

. Gasphase organics in environmental tobacco smoke: 2. exposure-relevant emission factors and indirect exposures from habitual smoking. Atmos Environ. 2003;37:5551–5561.

26.

Turner

Kingsley

. Federal Programs or Addressing Low-Income Housing Needs: A Policy Primer. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2008. Available at: http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/411798_low-income_housing.pdf. Accessed October 26, 2012.

27.

Dept of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Public and Indian Housing . Non-smoking policies in public housing (memorandum). Available at: http://www.hud.gov/offices/pih/publications/notices/09/pih2009-21.pdf. Published July 17, 2009. Accessed January 15, 2013.

28.

Drach

Pizacani

Rohde

Schubert

. The acceptability of comprehensive smoke-free policies to low-income tenants in subsidized housing. Prev Chronic Dis. 2010;7:A67.

29.

Kok

Gottlieb

Commers

Smerecnik

. The ecological approach in health promotion programs: A decade later. Am J Health Promot. 2008;22:437–442.

30.

Bennett

McNeill

Wolin

. Safe to walk: Neighborhood safety and physical activity among public housing residents. PLoS Med. 2007;4:1599–1607.

31.

Hood

Ferketich

Klein

. Associations between self-reported in-home smoking behaviours and surface nicotine concentrations in multiunit subsidised housing [published online ahead of print October 23, 2012]. Tob Control. doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2012-050666.

32.

Wakefield

Banham

Martin

. Restrictions on smoking at home and urinary cotinine levels among children with asthma. Am J Prev Med. 2000;19:188–192.

33.

Ryan

Trosclair

Gfroerer

. Adult current smoking: Differences in definitions and prevalence estimates—NHIS and NSDUH, 2008 [published online ahead of print May 9, 2012]. J Environ Public Health. doi:10.1155/2012/918368.

34.

Fidler

Shahab

West

. Strength of urges to smoke as a measure of severity of cigarette dependence: Comparison with the Fagerstrom test for nicotine dependence and its components. Addiction. 2011;106:631–638.

35.

Hennrikus

Pentel

Sandell

. Preferences and practices among renters regarding smoking restrictions in apartment buildings. Tob Control. 2003;12:189–194.

36.

Robinson

Lawton

Taylor

Perkins

. Multilevel longitudinal impacts of incivilities: Fear of crime, expected safety, and block satisfaction. J Quant Criminol. 2003;19:237–274.

37.

Sampson

Raudenbush

Earls

. Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science. 1997;277:918–924.

38.

Hosmer

Lemeshow

. Applied Logistic Regression. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 2000.

39.

Community Properties of Ohio . Revitalizing neighborhoods, impacting lives. Available at: http://www.cpoms.org/downloads/cpo_story_brochure.pdf. Accessed October 19, 2012.

40.

Calabro

Costello

Prokhorov

. Denormalization of tobacco use and the role of the pediatric health-care provider. Pediatr Allergy Immunol Pulmonol. 2010;23:273–278.

41.

Thomson

Wilson

Howden-Chapman

. Population level policy options for increasing the prevalence of smokefree homes. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006;60:298–304.

42.

Priest

Roseby

Waters

. Family and carer smoking control programmes for reducing children's exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008:CD001746.

43.

Greaves

Hemsing

. Women and tobacco control policies: Social-structural and psychosocial contributions to vulnerability to tobacco use and exposure. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2009;104(suppl 1):S121–S130.

44.

Blackburn

Spencer

Bonas

. Effect of strategies to reduce exposure of infants to environmental tobacco smoke in the home: Cross sectional survey. BMJ. 2003;327:257.

45.

Ritchie

Amos

Phillips

. Action to achieve smoke-free homes—an exploration of experts' views. BMC Public Health. 2009;9:1–10.

46.

Matt

Quintana

PJE

Destaillats

. Thirdhand tobacco smoke: Emerging evidence and arguments for a multidisciplinary research agenda. Environ Health Perspect. 2011;119:1218–1226.