Evaluation of Secondhand Smoke Exposure in New York City Public Housing After Implementation of the 2018 Federal Smoke-Free Housing Policy

A systematic review and network meta-analysis of population-level interventions to tackle smoking behaviour

This preregistered systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD 42022311392) aimed to synthesize the effectiveness of all available population-level tobacco policies on smoking behaviour. Our search across 5 databases and leading organizational websites resulted in 9,925 records, with 476 studies meeting our inclusion criteria. In our narrative summary and both pairwise and network meta-analyses, we identified anti-smoking campaigns, health warnings and tax increases as the most effective tobacco policies for promoting smoking cessation. Flavour bans and free/discounted nicotine replacement therapy also showed statistically significant positive effects on quit rates. The network meta-analysis results further indicated that smoking bans, anti-tobacco campaigns and tax increases effectively reduced smoking prevalence. In addition, flavour bans significantly reduced e-cigarette consumption. Both the narrative summary and the meta-analyses revealed that smoking bans, tax increases and anti-tobacco campaigns were associated with reductions in tobacco consumption and sales. On the basis of the available evidence, anti-tobacco campaigns, smoking bans, health warnings and tax increases are probably the most effective policies for curbing smoking behaviour.

Resident Support for the Federally Mandated Smoke-Free Rule in Public Housing: 2018-2022

This study examines support for the Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) mandatory smoke-free rule up to four years post-rule among smokers and non-smokers. A repeated cross-sectional design was used where District of Columbia public housing residents aged 18+ (n = 529) completed surveys during three time points: July 2018 (pre-rule), November 2018-March 2020 (post-rule), and September 2020-December 2022 (post-rule + COVID-19). Full support for the rule was indicated by agreeing that smoking should not be allowed in all indoor locations and within 25 feet of buildings. Descriptive statistics showed significant differences in support across time for smokers (5.3%, 30.7%, and 22.5%, respectively) and similar support across time for nonsmokers (48.2%, 52.2%, and 40.0%, respectively). In unstratified regression analysis, pre-rule support was lower than when the rule was in effect (aOR = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.25, 0.90), and tobacco users were less likely to support the rule (aOR = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.23, 0.50). Stratified logistic regression results showed that pre-rule support was lower among smokers compared to post-rule support (aOR = 0.14, 95% CI = 0.03, 0.59); support among nonsmokers did not vary by time. Findings overall indicate low support for the smoke-free rule up to 4 years post-implementation. Engaging residents with the rule and promoting health and well-being may further enhance policy effectiveness and acceptance.

Neighborhoods and Cardiovascular Health: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

The neighborhoods where individuals reside shape environmental exposures, access to resources, and opportunities. The inequitable distribution of resources and opportunities across neighborhoods perpetuates and exacerbates cardiovascular health inequities. Thus, interventions that address the neighborhood environment could reduce the inequitable burden of cardiovascular disease in disenfranchised populations. The objective of this scientific statement is to provide a roadmap illustrating how current knowledge regarding the effects of neighborhoods on cardiovascular disease can be used to develop and implement effective interventions to improve cardiovascular health at the population, health system, community, and individual levels. PubMed/Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane Library reviews, and ClinicalTrials.gov were used to identify observational studies and interventions examining or targeting neighborhood conditions in relation to cardiovascular health. The scientific statement summarizes how neighborhoods have been incorporated into the actions of health care systems, interventions in community settings, and policies and interventions that involve modifying the neighborhood environment. This scientific statement presents promising findings that can be expanded and implemented more broadly and identifies methodological challenges in designing studies to evaluate important neighborhood-related policies and interventions. Last, this scientific statement offers recommendations for areas that merit further research to promote a deeper understanding of the contributions of neighborhoods to cardiovascular health and health inequities and to stimulate the development of more effective interventions.

Systems and policies to reduce secondhand smoke in multiunit housing in Singapore: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Multiunit housing residents are often exposed to neighbours' secondhand smoke (SHS). Little is known on the current systems available to protect residents in places not covered by a residential smoking ban, or what constitutes an appropriate policy approach. This study explores relevant systems and policies in Singapore, a densely populated city-state where the vast majority live in multiunit housing and discussions on regulating smoking in homes are ongoing.

METHODS

In-depth interviews with 18 key informants involved in thought leadership, advocacy, policy or handling SHS complaints, and 14 smokers and 16 non-smokers exposed to SHS at home.

RESULTS

The current system to address neighbours' SHS comprises three steps: moral suasion, mediation and legal dispute. Moral suasion and mediation are often ineffective as they depend on smokers to willingly restrict their smoking habits. Legal dispute can yield a court order to stop smoking inside the home, but the process places a high evidence burden on complainants. While setting up designated smoking points or running social responsibility campaigns may help to create no-smoking norms, more intractable cases will likely require regulation, a polarising approach which raises concerns about privacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Without regulations to limit SHS in multiunit housing, current systems are limited in their enforceability as they treat SHS as a neighbourly nuisance rather than a public health threat.

COVID-19 Stay-At-Home Orders and Secondhand Smoke in Public Housing

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to better understand the inequitable impact of the pandemic by examining the associations between stay-at-home orders and indoor smoking in public housing, measured by ambient particulate matter at the 2.5-micron threshold, a marker for secondhand smoke.

METHODS

Particulate matter at the 2.5-micron threshold was measured in 6 public-housing buildings in Norfolk, VA from 2018 to 2022. Multilevel regression was used to compare the 7-week period of the Virginia stay-at-home order in 2020 with that period in other years.

RESULTS

Indoor particulate matter at the 2.5-micron threshold was 10.29 μg/m3 higher in 2020 (95% CI=8.51, 12.07) than in the same period in 2019, a 72% increase. Although particulate matter at the 2.5-micron threshold improved in 2021 and 2022, it remained elevated relative to the level in 2019.

CONCLUSIONS

Stay-at-home orders likely led to increased indoor secondhand smoke in public housing. In light of evidence linking air pollutants, including secondhand smoke, with COVID-19, these results also provide further evidence of the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on socioeconomically disadvantaged communities. This consequence of the pandemic response is unlikely to be isolated and calls for a critical examination of the COVID-19 experience to avoid similar policy failures in future public health crises.

A randomized control trial to support smoke-free policy compliance in public housing

BACKGROUND

Smoke-free housing policies in multiunit housing are increasingly widespread interventions to reduce smoking and secondhand smoke exposure. Little research has identified factors that impede compliance with smoke-free housing policies in low-income multiunit housing and test corresponding solutions.

METHODS

We are using an experimental design to test two compliance support interventions: (A) a "compliance through reduction (via relocation and reduction in personal smoking) and cessation" intervention targets households with smokers and involves support to shift smoking practices to areas beyond the apartment or building setting, reduce personal smoking, and deliver in-residence smoking cessation support services via trained peer educators and (B) a "compliance through resident endorsement" intervention involving voluntary adoption of smoke-free living environments through personal pledges, visible door markers, and/or via social media. We will compare randomly sampled participants in buildings that receive A or B or A plus B to the NYCHA standard approach.

DISCUSSION

This RCT addresses key gaps in knowledge and capitalizes on key scientific opportunities by (1) leveraging the federal mandate to ban smoking in a public housing system of more than sufficient size to conduct an adequately powered RCT; (2) expanding our understanding of smoke-free policy compliance beyond policy implementation by testing two novel treatments: (a) in-residence smoking cessation and (b) resident endorsement, while (3) addressing population and location-specific tobacco-related disparities. At the conclusion of the study, this RCT will have leveraged a monumental policy shift affecting nearly half a million NYC public housing residents, many of whom disproportionately experience chronic illness and are more likely to smoke and be exposed to secondhand smoke than other city residents. This first-ever RCT will test the effects of much-needed compliance strategies on resident smoking behavior and secondhand smoke exposure in multiunit housing.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials Registered, NCT05016505. Registered on August 23, 2021.

Multi-Level Influences of Smoke-Free Policies in Subsidized Housing: Applying the COM-B Model and Neighborhood Assessments to Inform Smoke-Free Policies

Smoke-free policies in multi-unit housing are associated with reduced exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS); however, attitudes toward comprehensive smoke-free policies among residents in subsidized multi-unit housing are unknown. In this mixed-methods study, we explored the socio-ecological context for tobacco and cannabis use and attitudes toward policies restricting indoor use of these products through interviews with residents (N = 134) and staff (N = 22) in 15 federally subsidized multi-unit housing in San Francisco, California. We conducted a geo-spatial and ethnographic environmental assessment by mapping alcohol, cannabis, and tobacco retail density using ArcGIS, and conducted systematic social observations of the neighborhood around each site for environmental cues to tobacco use. We used the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation behavior (COM-B) model to identify factors that might influence implementation of smoke-free policies in multi-unit housing. Knowledge and attitudes toward tobacco and cannabis use, social norms around smoking, neighborhood violence, and cannabis legalization were some of the social-ecological factors that influenced tobacco use. There was spatial variation in the availability of alcohol, cannabis, and tobacco stores around sites, which may have influenced residents' ability to maintain smoke-free homes. Lack of skill on how to moderate indoor smoking (psychological capability), lack of safe neighborhoods (physical opportunity), and the stigma of smoking outdoors in multi-unit housing (motivation) were some of the barriers to adopting a smoke-free home. Interventions to increase adoption of smoke-free policies in multi-unit housing need to address the co-use of tobacco and cannabis and commercial and environmental determinants of tobacco use to facilitate smoke-free living.

A Matched Analysis of the Association Between Federally Mandated Smoke-Free Housing Policies and Health Outcomes Among Medicaid-Enrolled Children in Subsidized Housing, New York City, 2015-2019

Smoke-free housing policies are intended to reduce the deleterious health effects of secondhand smoke exposure, but there is limited evidence regarding their health impacts. We examined associations between implementation of a federal smoke-free housing rule by the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) and pediatric Medicaid claims for asthma, lower respiratory tract infections, and upper respiratory tract infections in the early post-policy intervention period. We used geocoded address data to match children living in tax lots with NYCHA buildings (exposed to the policy) to children living in lots with other subsidized housing (unexposed to the policy). We constructed longitudinal difference-in-differences models to assess relative changes in monthly rates of claims between November 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019 (the policy was introduced on July 30, 2018). We also examined effect modification by baseline age group (≤2, 3-6, or 7-15 years). In New York City, introduction of a smoke-free policy was not associated with lower rates of Medicaid claims for any outcomes in the early postpolicy period. Exposure to the smoke-free policy was associated with slightly higher than expected rates of outpatient upper respiratory tract infection claims (incidence rate ratio = 1.05, 95% confidence interval: 1.01, 1.08), a result most pronounced among children aged 3-6 years. Ongoing monitoring is essential to understanding long-term health impacts of smoke-free housing policies.

Invited Commentary: Use of Epidemiologic Methods to Guide Comprehensive and Equitable Approaches to Policy

Despite a dramatic reduction in the prevalence of commercial cigarette smoking in the United States, children are still commonly exposed to secondhand smoke (SHS), which is a cause of various pediatric health problems. Further, SHS exposure is patterned by race and class, exacting an inequitable toll on children from families with lesser social and economic advantage. In this issue of the Journal, Titus et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2023;192(1):25-33) use natural experiment evaluation methods (difference-in-differences) to test whether the recently implemented US Department of Housing and Urban Development policy that forbade smoking in and around New York City Housing Authority buildings affected child respiratory health. The results from their work remind us that policies do not always impact outcomes as we might expect. Given that policy is one of the most potent tools for population health promotion, this work underlines the need for epidemiologists to engage in policy evaluation at all stages of the policy life cycle, in order to discover comprehensive approaches to policy development and implementation that prioritize equity and address structural racism.

Long-Term Trends in Secondhand Smoke Exposure in High-Rise Housing Serving Low-Income Residents in New York City: Three-Year Evaluation of a Federal Smoking Ban in Public Housing, 2018-2021

INTRODUCTION

In July 2018, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development passed a rule requiring public housing authorities to implement smoke-free housing (SFH) policies. We measured secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure immediately before, and repeatedly up to 36 months post-SFH policy implementation in a purposeful sample of 21 New York City (NYC) high-rise buildings (>15 floors): 10 NYC Housing Authority (NYCHA) buildings subject to the policy and 11 privately managed buildings in which most residents received housing vouchers (herein "Section 8").

AIMS AND METHODS

We invited participants from nonsmoking households (NYCHA n = 157, Section-8 n = 118) to enroll in a longitudinal air monitoring study, measuring (1) nicotine concentration with passive, bisulfate-coated filters, and (2) particulate matter (PM2.5) with low-cost particle sensors. We also measured nicotine concentrations and counted cigarette butts in common areas (n = 91 stairwells and hallways). We repeated air monitoring sessions in households and common areas every 6 months, totaling six post-policy sessions.

RESULTS

After 3 years, we observed larger declines in nicotine concentration in NYCHA hallways than in Section-8, [difference-in-difference (DID) = -1.92 µg/m3 (95% CI -2.98, -0.87), p = .001]. In stairwells, nicotine concentration declines were larger in NYCHA buildings, but the differences were not statistically significant [DID= -1.10 µg/m3 (95% CI -2.40, 0.18), p = .089]. In households, there was no differential change in nicotine concentration (p = .093) or in PM2.5 levels (p = .385).

CONCLUSIONS

Nicotine concentration reductions in NYCHA common areas over 3 years may be attributable to the SFH policy, reflecting its gradual implementation over this time.

IMPLICATIONS

Continued air monitoring over multiple years has demonstrated that SHS exposure may be declining more rapidly in NYCHA common areas as a result of SFH policy adherence. This may have positive implications for improved health outcomes among those living in public housing, but additional tracking of air quality and studies of health outcomes are needed. Ongoing efforts by NYCHA to integrate the SFH policy into wider healthier-homes initiatives may increase policy compliance.

The smoke-free home study: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial of a smoke-free home intervention in permanent supportive housing

Background

Formerly chronically homeless adults who live in permanent supportive housing (PSH) have high prevalence of smoking. It is uncommon to find smoke-free policies in PSH because of the concern that such policies contradict PSH’s harm reduction framework and could increase homelessness should residents lose their housing because of the policy. However, in the absence of such policies, non-smoking PSH residents face the harmful effects of secondhand smoke exposure while residents who smoke see increased risks from high rates of smoking throughout their residence. Our pilot work highlighted the feasibility and acceptability of an intervention designed to promote voluntary adoption of a smoke-free home. Here we report a protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial of the smoke-free home intervention for formerly chronically homeless residents in PSH.

Methods

The smoke-free home intervention provides face-to-face counseling and instruction to PSH residents on how to adopt a smoke-free home and offers training for PSH staff on how to refer residents to tobacco cessation services. We will randomize 20 PSH sites in the San Francisco Bay Area to either the intervention or wait-list control arms. We will enroll 400 PSH residents who smoke cigarettes in their housing unit and 120 PSH staff who work at the sites. At baseline, three- and six-months follow-up, we will ask residents to report their tobacco use and cessation behaviors and adoption of smoke-free homes. We will ask staff to answer questions on their knowledge, attitudes, practices, and barriers related to supporting residents’ smoking cessation. The primary outcome for PSH residents is adoption of smoke-free homes for 90 days or more at six-months follow-up, and the secondary outcome is point prevalence tobacco abstinence. The primary outcome for PSH staff is change in Smoking Knowledge Attitudes Practices survey score.

Discussion

Voluntary adoption of smoke-free homes is a promising approach for reducing exposure to secondhand smoke and reducing tobacco use among a population facing high rates of tobacco-related disease, and is aligned with PSH’s harm reduction framework. Findings from this study have the potential to inform adoption of tobacco control policies among vulnerable populations most at risk for smoking-related harms.

Trial registration

This study was registered with the U.S. National Institute of Health Clinical Trials register on April 22, 2021: NCT04855357.

"I think everybody will have to get together for it to work": NYCHA Tenant Perspectives on HUD's 2018 Smoke-Free Mandate Captured Prior to Policy Implementation

INTRODUCTION

In July 2018, a new federal mandate by the Department of Housing and Urban Development went into effect requiring all US public housing authorities to implement policies banning smoking in living units, indoor common areas, administrative buildings, and outdoor areas within 25 feet of these buildings. Although some housing authorities had smoke-free policies in place for decades, others had to implement them for the first time. Housing authorities continue to face challenges in ensuring compliance with these policies, and resident perspectives can greatly inform measures to promote adherence.

AIMS AND METHODS

We conducted in-person interviews with 20 New York City Housing Authority tenants in April 2018. Our thematic analysis examined resident opinions on the upcoming smoke-free housing policy.

RESULTS

Although 65% of residents supported the policy, 50% anticipated poor adherence due to expected lack of enforcement, safety issues with smoking outdoors, and general discontent with the housing authority and living conditions. However, many participants felt adherence could be improved if the housing authority optimized resource-provision and communication with tenants.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study adds to existing literature examining tenant views on the controversial topic of mandatory smoke-free housing policies, and our interviews were conducted at a unique time prior to policy implementation in the country's largest public housing authority. Based on our results, we provide recommendations for housing authorities including: (1) information and resource-provision, (2) safety enhancement, and (3) relationship building with tenants in order to maximize policy adherence.

IMPLICATIONS

Our study is unique because we captured resident views prior to policy implementation in a housing authority without a preexisting smoke-free policy in place. In comparison, most recent research on this topic has focused on the postimplementation period or used survey research methods in the preimplementation phase. Our findings add to extant research about tenant perspectives on smoke-free housing policies and offer suggestions to address barriers to compliance.

Feasibility of low-cost particle sensor types in long-term indoor air pollution health studies after repeated calibration, 2019-2021

Previous studies have explored using calibrated low-cost particulate matter (PM) sensors, but important research gaps remain regarding long-term performance and reliability. Evaluate longitudinal performance of low-cost particle sensors by measuring sensor performance changes over 2 years of use. 51 low-cost particle sensors (Airbeam 1 N = 29; Airbeam 2 N = 22) were calibrated four times over a 2-year timeframe between 2019 and 2021. Cigarette smoke-specific calibration curves for Airbeam 1 and 2 PM sensors were created by directly comparing simultaneous 1-min readings of a Thermo Scientific Personal DataRAM PDR-1500 unit with a 2.5 µm inlet. Inter-sensor variability in calibration coefficient was high, particularly in Airbeam 1 sensors at study initiation. Calibration coefficients for both sensor types trended downwards over time to < 1 at final calibration timepoint [Airbeam 1 Mean (SD) = 0.87 (0.20); Airbeam 2 Mean (SD) = 0.96 (0.27)]. We lost more Airbeam 1 sensors (N = 27 out of 56, failure rate 48.2%) than Airbeam 2 (N = 2 out of 24, failure rate 8.3%) due to electronics, battery, or data output issues. Evidence suggests degradation over time might depend more on particle sensor type, rather than individual usage. Repeated calibrations of low-cost particle sensors may increase confidence in reported PM levels in longitudinal indoor air pollution studies.

Financial Insecurity and Food Insecurity among U.S. Children with Secondhand and Thirdhand Smoke Exposure

Objectives: Smokers with financial and food insecurity may find it difficult to quit smoking and reduce their children’s tobacco smoke exposure (TSE). The objective was to examine the associations between child TSE and financial and food insecurity among U.S. school-aged children. Methods: We examined the 2018−2019 National Survey of Children’s Health data on 17,484 children 6−11 years old. Children were categorized into TSE groups: (1) No TSE: did not live with a smoker; (2) thirdhand smoke (THS) exposure alone: lived with a smoker who did not smoke inside the home; or (3) secondhand smoke (SHS) and THS exposure: lived with a smoker who smoked inside the home. We conducted weighted logistic, ordinal, and linear regression analyses to assess the relationships between child TSE status and financial and food insecurity, adjusting for covariates. Results: Overall, 13.1% and 1.8% of children had THS exposure alone and SHS and THS exposure, respectively. Compared to children with no TSE, children with THS exposure alone were at 2.17 increased odds (95% CI = 1.83, 2.58, p < 0.001) and children with SHS and THS exposure were at 2.24 increased odds (95% CI = 1.57, 3.19, p < 0.001) of having financial insecurity. Children with THS exposure alone were at 1.92 increased odds (95% CI = 1.58, 2.33, p < 0.001) and children with SHS and THS exposure were at 2.14 increased odds (95% CI = 1.45, 3.16, p < 0.001) of having food insecurity. Conclusions: Children with TSE are at increased risk of experiencing financial and food insecurity. When developing tobacco interventions, a holistic approach to tobacco control that addresses ways to decrease financial and food hardships may improve outcomes.

Behavioural intentions in response to a potential menthol cigarette sales ban: a survey examining smokers in Washington, DC public housing

OBJECTIVES

Local, national and international policies are being proposed to ban the sale of menthol-flavoured tobacco products. With more bans being implemented, it is increasingly important to understand reactions to these bans among smokers of low socioeconomic status. This study examined public housing residents' behavioural intentions if menthol-flavoured cigarettes were no longer sold.

SETTING

15 District of Columbia Housing Authority properties between March 2019 and March 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

221 District of Columbia Housing Authority residents ages 18-80 years who reported smoking menthol cigarettes (83.3% African-American/black).

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Cigarette quitting and switching intentions due to a hypothetical menthol-flavoured cigarette sales ban.

RESULTS

Nearly one-half (48.0%) of residents said they intended to quit cigarette use if menthol-flavoured products were no longer sold, while 27.2% were unsure if they would quit, and 24.9% reported they would not quit. Older residents (OR 0.94 per year, 95% CI 0.91 to 0.97), senior/disabled building versus family building residents (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.97), those who smoked within 30 min of waking (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.98) and daily smokers (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.84) had lower odds of reporting quit intentions associated with a menthol ban. Of those not intending to quit, 40.7% reported they would switch to non-menthol cigarettes, 20.4% to another non-menthol product, 13.0% to menthol e-cigarettes and 20.4% to another menthol product.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest banning the sale of menthol-flavoured products has the potential to impact cigarette smoking cessation. Nearly three-quarters of smokers in public housing indicated a possibility of quitting smoking because of a menthol cigarette ban. Bans that include all flavours in all tobacco products may be most effective for facilitating overall tobacco cessation.

Residential secondhand smoke in a densely populated urban setting: a qualitative exploration of psychosocial impacts, views and experiences

Background

People remain exposed to secondhand smoke, a serious health hazard, inside their home as households face challenges in setting no-smoking rules or are exposed to secondhand smoke drifting in from neighbouring homes. This study explores the psychosocial impacts, views, and experiences with residential secondhand smoke in a densely populated urban setting. 

Methods

In-depth online or face to face interviews with 18 key informants who had been involved in public discourse, policy, advocacy or handling complaints related to residential secondhand smoke, 14 smokers, and 16 non-smokers exposed to secondhand smoke inside their home. All participants were residents of Singapore, a densely populated, multi-ethnic city-state. Interview transcripts were coded in NVivo using a deductive and inductive coding process.

Findings

Secondhand smoke has wide-reaching impacts on physical and psychosocial wellbeing, even if smokers tried to minimise secondhand smoke. Feelings of anxiety and stress are generally tied to feeling discomfort in one’s personal space, a perceived lack of control over the situation, resentment towards smokers, and concerns over the health effects. Family, community, and cultural dynamics add complexities to tackling the issue, especially in patriarchal households. Secondhand smoke exposure from neighbours is considered a widespread issue, exacerbated by structural factors such as building layout and the COVID-19 pandemic. Resolving the issue amicably is considered challenging due to the absence of regulations and a reluctance to stir up conflict with neighbours. While smokers took measures to reduce secondhand smoke, these were described as ineffective by other participants. Smokers appeared to have contrasting views from other participants on what it means to smoke in a socially responsible manner.

Conclusion

Given the wide-reaching psychosocial impacts of residential secondhand smoke, there is a case for stronger interventions, especially in densely populated urban settings where it is more difficult to avoid.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-13561-7.

Home Tobacco Smoke Exposure and Neighborhood Support and Safety among U.S. School-aged Children

Children who are socioeconomically disadvantaged face a myriad of environmental hardships in the neighborhoods in which they live. This study examined the associations between home tobacco smoke exposure (TSE) and neighborhood support, neighborhood safety, and school safety among U.S. school-aged children. Children ages 6-11 years were included in this secondary analysis of 2018-2019 National Survey of Children's Health data (N = 17,300). Children's home TSE status was categorized into three levels: (1) no TSE: Child did not live with a smoker; (2) Outside TSE only: Child lived with a smoker who did not smoke inside the home; and (3) Inside TSE: Child lived with a smoker who smoked inside the home. Parent-reported measures of perceived neighborhood support, and neighborhood and school safety were examined; covariates included the child's age, sex, and race/ethnicity; the parent's education; the family's household structure, and federal poverty level. Weighted logistic and ordinal regression models were built adjusting for the covariates. In total, 13.2% of children had outside TSE and 1.7% of children had inside TSE. Multivariable logistic regression model results indicated that children with outside TSE were at decreased odds (AOR = 0.79, 95%CI = 0.65-0.96) of living in a supportive neighborhood compared to children with no TSE. Ordinal regression model results indicated that children with outside TSE (AOR = 0.77, 95%CI = 0.61-0.97) and children with inside TSE were at decreased odds (AOR = 0.62, 95%CI = 0.39-0.99) of going to a school that was perceived as safe. Community-level programs, policies, and funding are needed to improve neighborhood characteristics among children with TSE to improve their future health outcomes.

Disparities in Marijuana and Tobacco Smoke Incursions Among New York City Families During Early Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic

OBJECTIVES

Once the COVID-19 pandemic arrived in New York City (NYC), stay-at-home orders led to more time spent indoors, potentially increasing exposure to secondhand marijuana and tobacco smoke via incursions from common areas or neighbors. The objective of this study was to characterize housing-based disparities in marijuana and tobacco incursions in NYC housing during the pandemic.

DESIGN

We surveyed a random sample of families from May to July 2020 and collected sociodemographic data, housing characteristics, and the presence, frequency, and pandemic-related change in incursions.

SETTING

Five pediatric practices affiliated with a large NYC health care system.

PARTICIPANTS

In total, 230 caregivers of children attending the practices.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Prevalence and change in tobacco and marijuana smoke incursions.

RESULTS

Tobacco and marijuana smoke incursions were reported by 22.9% and 30.7%, respectively. Twenty-two percent of families received financial housing support (public housing, Section-8). Compared with families in private housing, families with financial housing support had 3.8 times the odds of tobacco incursions (95% CI, 1.4-10.1) and 3.7 times the odds of worsening incursions during pandemic (95% CI, 1.1-12.5). Families with financially supported housing had 6.9 times the odds of marijuana incursions (95% CI, 2.4-19.5) and 5 times the odds of worsening incursions during pandemic (95% CI, 1.9-12.8). Children in financially supported housing spent more time inside the home during pandemic (median 24 hours vs 21.6 hours, P = .02) and were more likely to have asthma (37% vs 12.9%, P = .001) than children in private housing.

CONCLUSIONS

Incursions were higher among families with financially supported housing. Better enforcement of existing regulations (eg, Smoke-Free Public Housing Rule) and implementation of additional policies to limit secondhand tobacco and marijuana exposure in children are needed. Such actions should prioritize equitable access to cessation and mental health services and consider structural systems leading to poverty and health disparities.

Changes in Reported Secondhand Smoke Incursions and Smoking Behavior after Implementation of a Federal Smoke-Free Rule in New York State Federally Subsidized Public Housing

This study assessed changes in smoking behavior and secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure after implementation of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rule prohibiting the use of cigarettes, cigars, pipes, and waterpipes in all federally subsidized public housing, including within residential units (apartments). Using quantitative data from a repeated cross-sectional mail survey of New York State residents of five public housing authorities (N = 761 at Wave 1, N = 649 at Wave 2), we found evidence of policy compliance (99% decrease in odds of self-reported smoking in units, OR = 0.01, p < 0.01, CI: 0.00−0.16), reduced SHS incursions (77% decrease in odds of smelling smoke within developments, OR = 0.23, p < 0.01, CI: 0.13−0.44), and lower reported smoking rates in July 2018 (9.5%, down from 16.8%), 10 months after implementation of the rule. Despite evident success, one-fifth of residents reported smelling smoke inside their apartment at least a few times per week. This study provides insights into how the policy was implemented in selected New York public housing authorities, offers evidence of policy-intended effects, and highlights challenges to consistent and impactful policy implementation.

Implementing the Federal Smoke-Free Public Housing Policy in New York City: Understanding Challenges and Opportunities for Improving Policy Impact

In 2018, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development required public housing authorities to implement a smoke-free housing (SFH) policy that included individual apartments. We analyzed the policy implementation process in the New York City Public Housing Authority (NYCHA). From June-November 2019, we conducted 9 focus groups with 64 NYCHA residents (smokers and nonsmokers), 8 key informant interviews with NYCHA staff and resident association leaders, and repeated surveys with a cohort of 130 nonsmoking households pre- and 12-month post policy. One year post policy implementation, participants reported widespread smoking violations and multi-level factors impeding policy implementation. These included the shared belief among residents and staff that the policy overreached by "telling people what to do in their own apartments". This hindered compliance and enforcement efforts. Inconsistent enforcement of illegal marijuana use, staff smoking violations, and a lack of accountability for other pressing housing issues created the perception that smokers were being unfairly targeted, as did the lack of smoking cessation resources. Resident support for the policy remained unchanged but satisfaction with enforcement declined (60.1% vs. 48.8%, p = 0.047). We identified multilevel contextual factors that are influencing SFH policy implementation. Findings can inform the design of strategies to optimize policy implementation.

Policy Support for Smoke-Free and E-Cigarette Free Multiunit Housing

PURPOSE

Estimate public support for prohibiting multiunit housing (MUH) e-cigarette and cigarette use.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Data from an online panel survey.

SAMPLE

A Fall 2018 nationally representative sample of 3,415 (99.3% response rate) United States (US) adults 18-64 years old.

MEASURES

Policy support for prohibiting MUH smoking and e-cigarette use, sociodemographics, and tobacco perceptions and behaviors.

ANALYSIS

Weighted multivariate logistic regression examined predictors of support for prohibiting 1) cigarette use and 2) e-cigarette use in MUH.

RESULTS

Most respondents expressed support for prohibiting smoking (76.9%) and e-cigarette use (74.0%) in MUH. About 17% (n = 588) of the sample lived in MUH, and living in MUH was not predictive of support for either policy. For both cigarette and e-cigarette policies, current smokers (n = 630; OR = 0.44, p < 0.001; OR = 0.59, p < 0.01) and current e-cigarette users (n = 305; OR = 0.42, p < 0.001; OR = 0.22, p < 0.001) had lower odds of support. Notably, while most smokers supported prohibiting cigarette (51.4%) and e-cigarette use in MUH (51.1%), there was less support among current e-cigarette users for prohibiting cigarette (48.1%) and e-cigarette use in MUH (34.5%).

CONCLUSION

Majority support for prohibiting smoking and e-cigarette use in MUH is promising for policy adoption; however, lower support of both policies among e-cigarette users needs to be examined, as increasing use of e-cigarettes may be shifting social norms away from support for smoke free housing policies.