Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Smoking Policy Change Within Permanent Supportive Housing.
J Community Health. 2018 04; 43(2):312-320.JC

Abstract

Smoke-free policies effectively reduce secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure among non-smokers, and reduce consumption, encourage quit attempts, and minimize relapse to smoking among smokers. Such policies are uncommon in permanent supportive housing (PSH) for formerly homeless individuals. In this study, we collaborated with a PSH provider in San Diego, California to assess a smoke-free policy that restricted indoor smoking. Between August and November 2015, residents completed a pre-policy questionnaire on attitudes toward smoke-free policies and exposure to secondhand smoke, and then 7-9 months after policy implementation residents were re-surveyed. At follow-up, there was a 59.7% reduction in indoor smoking. The proportion of residents who identified as current smokers reduced by 13% (95% CI: -38, 10.2). The proportion of residents who reported never smelling SHS indoors (apartment 24.2%, 95% CI: 4.2, 44.1; shared areas 17.2%, 95% CI: 1.7, 32.7); in outdoor areas next to the living unit (porches or patio 56.7%, 95% CI: 40.7, 72.8); and in other outdoor areas (parking lot 28.6%, 95% CI: 8.3, 48.9) was lower post-policy compared with pre-policy. Overall, resident support increased by 18.7%; however, the greatest increase in support occurred among current smokers (from 14.8 to 37.5%). Fewer current smokers reported that the policy would enable cessation at post-policy compared to pre-policy. Our findings demonstrate the feasibility of implementing smoke-free policies in PSH for formerly homeless adults. However, policy alone appears insufficient to trigger change in smoking behavior, highlighting the need for additional cessation resources to facilitate quitting.

Authors+Show Affiliations

School of Nursing, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA, USA.Department of Epidemiology, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA.Housing Innovation Partners, San Diego, CA, USA.Division of General Internal Medicine/Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, School of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Ave, Box 1364, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA. Maya.Vijayaraghavan@ucsf.edu.

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Language

eng

PubMed ID

28884243

Citation

Petersen, Anne Berit, et al. "Smoking Policy Change Within Permanent Supportive Housing." Journal of Community Health, vol. 43, no. 2, 2018, pp. 312-320.
Petersen AB, Stewart HC, Walters J, et al. Smoking Policy Change Within Permanent Supportive Housing. J Community Health. 2018;43(2):312-320.
Petersen, A. B., Stewart, H. C., Walters, J., & Vijayaraghavan, M. (2018). Smoking Policy Change Within Permanent Supportive Housing. Journal of Community Health, 43(2), 312-320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-017-0423-7
Petersen AB, et al. Smoking Policy Change Within Permanent Supportive Housing. J Community Health. 2018;43(2):312-320. PubMed PMID: 28884243.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Smoking Policy Change Within Permanent Supportive Housing. AU - Petersen,Anne Berit, AU - Stewart,Holly C, AU - Walters,Jon, AU - Vijayaraghavan,Maya, PY - 2017/9/9/pubmed PY - 2019/2/8/medline PY - 2017/9/9/entrez SP - 312 EP - 320 JF - Journal of community health JO - J Community Health VL - 43 IS - 2 N2 - Smoke-free policies effectively reduce secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure among non-smokers, and reduce consumption, encourage quit attempts, and minimize relapse to smoking among smokers. Such policies are uncommon in permanent supportive housing (PSH) for formerly homeless individuals. In this study, we collaborated with a PSH provider in San Diego, California to assess a smoke-free policy that restricted indoor smoking. Between August and November 2015, residents completed a pre-policy questionnaire on attitudes toward smoke-free policies and exposure to secondhand smoke, and then 7-9 months after policy implementation residents were re-surveyed. At follow-up, there was a 59.7% reduction in indoor smoking. The proportion of residents who identified as current smokers reduced by 13% (95% CI: -38, 10.2). The proportion of residents who reported never smelling SHS indoors (apartment 24.2%, 95% CI: 4.2, 44.1; shared areas 17.2%, 95% CI: 1.7, 32.7); in outdoor areas next to the living unit (porches or patio 56.7%, 95% CI: 40.7, 72.8); and in other outdoor areas (parking lot 28.6%, 95% CI: 8.3, 48.9) was lower post-policy compared with pre-policy. Overall, resident support increased by 18.7%; however, the greatest increase in support occurred among current smokers (from 14.8 to 37.5%). Fewer current smokers reported that the policy would enable cessation at post-policy compared to pre-policy. Our findings demonstrate the feasibility of implementing smoke-free policies in PSH for formerly homeless adults. However, policy alone appears insufficient to trigger change in smoking behavior, highlighting the need for additional cessation resources to facilitate quitting. SN - 1573-3610 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/28884243/Smoking_Policy_Change_Within_Permanent_Supportive_Housing_ L2 - https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10900-017-0423-7 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -