Compliance with the workplace-smoking ban in the Netherlands

Effect of smoke-free policies in outdoor areas and private places on children's tobacco smoke exposure and respiratory health: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Smoke-free policies in outdoor areas and semi-private and private places (eg, cars) might reduce the health harms caused by tobacco smoke exposure (TSE). We aimed to investigate the effect of smoke-free policies covering outdoor areas or semi-private and private places on TSE and respiratory health in children, to inform policy.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched 13 electronic databases from date of inception to Jan 29, 2021, for published studies that assessed the effects of smoke-free policies in outdoor areas or semi-private or private places on TSE, respiratory health outcomes, or both, in children. Non-randomised and randomised trials, interrupted time series, and controlled before-after studies, without restrictions to the observational period, publication date, or language, were eligible for the main analysis. Two reviewers independently extracted data, including adjusted test statistics from each study using a prespecified form, and assessed risk of bias for effect estimates from each study using the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions tool. Primary outcomes were TSE in places covered by the policy, unplanned hospital attendance for wheezing or asthma, and unplanned hospital attendance for respiratory tract infections, in children younger than 17 years. Random-effects meta-analyses were done when at least two studies evaluated policies that regulated smoking in similar places and reported on the same outcome. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020190563.

FINDINGS

We identified 5745 records and assessed 204 full-text articles for eligibility, of which 11 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the qualitative synthesis. Of these studies, seven fit prespecified robustness criteria as recommended by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care group, assessing smoke-free cars (n=5), schools (n=1), and a comprehensive policy covering multiple areas (n=1). Risk of bias was low in three studies, moderate in three, and critical in one. In the meta-analysis of ten effect estimates from four studies, smoke-free car policies were associated with an immediate TSE reduction in cars (risk ratio 0·69, 95% CI 0·55-0·87; 161 466 participants); heterogeneity was substantial (I² 80·7%; p<0·0001). One additional study reported a gradual TSE decrease in cars annually. Individual studies found TSE reductions on school grounds, following a smoke-free school policy, and in hospital attendances for respiratory tract infection, following a comprehensive smoke-free policy.

INTERPRETATION

Smoke-free car policies are associated with reductions in reported child TSE in cars, which could translate into respiratory health benefits. Few additional studies assessed the effect of policies regulating smoking in outdoor areas and semi-private and private places on children's TSE or health outcomes. On the basis of these findings, governments should consider including private cars in comprehensive smoke-free policies to protect child health.

FUNDING

Dutch Heart Foundation, Lung Foundation Netherlands, Dutch Cancer Society, Dutch Diabetes Research Foundation, Netherlands Thrombosis Foundation, and Health Data Research UK.

Impact of an inner-city smoke-free zone on outdoor smoking patterns: a before-after study

Introduction

On September 2, 2019, Rotterdam’s first inner-city outdoor smoke-free zone encompassing the Erasmus MC, a large university hospital in the Netherlands, the Erasmiaans high school, the Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences and the public road in between, was implemented.

Aims and Methods

We aimed to assess spatiotemporal patterning of smoking before and after implementation of this outdoor smoke-free zone. We performed a before–after observational field study. We systematically observed the number of smokers, and their locations and characteristics over 37 days before and after implementation of the smoke-free zone.

Results

Before implementation of the smoke-free zone, 4098 people smoked in the area every weekday during working hours. After implementation, the daily number of smokers was 2241, a 45% reduction (p = .007). There was an increase of 432 smokers per day near and just outside the borders of the zone. At baseline, 31% of the smokers were categorized as employee, 22% as student and 3% as patient. Following implementation of the smoke-free zone, the largest decreases in smokers were observed among employees (–67%, p value .004) and patients (–70%, p value .049). Before and after implementation, 21 and 20 smokers were visibly addressed and asked to smoke elsewhere.

Conclusions

Implementation of an inner-city smoke-free zone was associated with a substantial decline in the number of smokers in the zone and an overall reduction of smoking in the larger area. Further research should focus on optimizing implementation of and compliance with outdoor smoke-free zones.

Implications

A smoke-free outdoor policy has the potential to denormalize and discourage smoking, support smokers who want to quit, and to protect people from secondhand smoke exposure. Implementation of an inner-city smoke-free zone encompassing a large tertiary hospital and two educational institutions was associated with a substantial decline in the number of smokers in the zone, as well as in the larger area. Voluntary outdoor smoke-free zones can help reduce the number of smokers in the area and protect people from secondhand smoke. There is a need to explore effectiveness of additional measures to further improve compliance.

Smoking at the workplaces in Italy after the smoking ban in the Lazio Region

Background:

In Italy, an anti-smoking law was issued in 2003, with the aim of reducing tobacco smoking inside public places.

Objectives:

The aim of the study was to assess the observance of the smoking ban in Italy, during the period 2010-2014, in several workplaces and to evaluate the perception of workers, both smokers and non-smokers, on this issue.

Methods:

This cross-sectional study analyzed data resulting from a self-administered questionnaires in 59 companies, from several working sectors (transport, healthcare and building), in the Latium Region in Italy.

Results:

Out of 7200 questionnaires, 6996 were included in the analysis: 43.7% of the employees think that the smoking ban is respected in the workplace; women are more prone to think that the ban is not observed. Smokers tend to perceive the ban to be respected (AOR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.62-0.77) while non-smokers feel more exposed to second-hand smoke (AOR: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.39-1.77). Workers in intellectual and highly specialized professions (AOR: 1.63; 95% CI: 1.25-2.13), technical professions (AOR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.28-2.10) and craftsmen, skilled workers and farmers (AOR: 1.42; 95% CI: 1.09-1.85) tend to perceive the smoking ban not to be observed and the last two classes are the ones who feel the most exposed to second-hand smoke (AOR: 6.68; 95% CI: 0.50-0.90; AOR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.38-0.70).

Discussion:

The results of this study can be used as a starting point for the implementation of new strategies to reduce tobacco addiction, beginning from the compliance with the ban on smoking in the workplace and the promotion of a healthy lifestyle.

Facilitators and Barriers of Smokers' Compliance with Smoking Bans in Public Places: A Systematic Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Literature

Background: Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure is associated with an increased risk of many diseases. Many countries have ratified a national smoking ban in public places, but studies on factors related to smoking issues in public places post-ban are lacking. Aim: To identify facilitators and barriers that influenced smokers’ compliance with smoking bans in public places. Methods: Using PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Web of Science database, we conducted a systematic search of English articles published before June 2015 on factors of smokers’ compliance with the smoking bans in public places. Results: A total of 390 references were identified, among which seventeen articles (twelve quantitative studies, two qualitative studies, three mixed-method studies) were included in this review. These studies focused on four types of public places including recreational venues (n = 7), hospital (n = 5), school (n = 4), and workplace (n = 1). Factors at the  individual-, interpersonal-, and organizational-level were identified: at the individual level, nicotine dependence, insufficiency of tobacco-related knowledge, and the negative attitudes towards smoking bans were the most commonly identified barriers; at the interpersonal level, the smoking behaviors of people around, close relatives, and friends’ approval were the main barriers; and at the organizational level, the main barriers were inefficient implementation of the bans and the inconvenience of the designative smoking areas. Conclusions: This synthesis of the literature provided evidence of the identified barriers and facilitators of smokers’ compliance with the smoking bans. It will be beneficial for the policy-maker to consider interventions on multiple levels of factors to overcome the barriers and enhance smokers’ compliance with the smoking bans in public places.

Socioeconomic inequalities in smoking in The Netherlands before and during the Global Financial Crisis: a repeated cross-sectional study

Background

The Global Financial Crisis (GFC) increased levels of financial strain, especially in those of low socioeconomic status (SES). Financial strain can affect smoking behaviour.

This study examines socioeconomic inequalities in current smoking and smoking cessation in The Netherlands before and during the Global Financial Crisis (GFC).

Methods

Participants were 66,960 Dutch adults (≥18 years) who took part in the annual national Health Survey (2004–2011). Period was dichotomised: ‘pre-’ and ‘during-GFC’. SES measures used were income, education and neighbourhood deprivation. Outcomes were current smoking rates (smokers/total population) and smoking cessation ratios (former smokers/ever smokers). Multilevel logistic regression models controlled for individual characteristics and tested for interaction between period and SES.

Results

In both periods, high SES respondents (in all indicators) had lower current smoking levels and higher cessation ratios than those of middle or low SES. Inequalities in current smoking increased significantly in poorly educated adults of 45–64 years of age (Odds Ratio (OR) low educational level compared with high: 2.00[1.79-2.23] compared to pre-GFC 1.67[1.50-1.86], p for interaction = 0.02). Smoking cessation inequalities by income in 18–30 year olds increased with borderline significance during the GFC (OR low income compared to high income: 0.73[0.58-0.91]) compared to pre-GFC (OR: 0.98[0.80-1.20]), p for interaction = 0.051).

Conclusions

Overall, socioeconomic inequalities in current smoking and smoking cessation were unchanged during the GFC. However, current smoking inequalities by education, and smoking cessation inequalities by income, increased in specific age groups. Increased financial strain caused by the crisis may disproportionately affect smoking behaviour in some disadvantaged groups.

An exploratory study of smokers' and stakeholders' expectations of the implementation of a smoke-free policy in a university setting

ISSUES ADDRESSED

Smoke-free policies restricting tobacco use in public places are common in many middle- and high-income countries. Implementation of a smoke-free policy does not automatically result in a smoke-free environment, and appropriate enforcement procedures must be clearly communicated and implemented. Safety and restrictions in private spaces, especially student housing, are also issues that need to be explored. This research explored perceptions and attitudes of staff and student smokers and key stakeholders before the implementation of a complete campus ban on smoking at a large Australian university.

METHODS

Interviews were conducted with staff and student smokers (n=9) and stakeholders (n=9). The interviews explored attitudes towards a completely smoke-free policy in the university environment, perceptions relating to enforcement of and compliance with a completely smoke-free policy, and support needed from the university for smokers.

RESULTS

Participants generally supported a complete smoke-free policy. Key themes associated with the policy implementation included health implications, stigmatisation and labelling, liberty, and enforcement.

CONCLUSION

Smoke-free policies require careful planning, evaluation, and appropriate enforcement to ensure maximum impact. Further research is needed to improve compliance with smoke-free policies in outdoor environments and diverse spaces. SO WHAT? A better understanding of attitudes and intentions towards a smoke-free policy before implementation may provide useful insight into the potential challenges and provide guidelines for the development of strategies to improve policy readiness and adherence. University support for smokers to quit is essential when implementing a smoke-free policy.

Complete workplace indoor smoking ban and smoking behavior among male workers and female nonsmoking workers' husbands: a pseudo cohort study of Japanese public workers

A pseudo cohort study using national cross-sections (2001, 2004, 2007, and 2010) was conducted to examine differences in smoking prevalence under different smoking ban policies such as a complete workplace indoor smoking ban (early or recent implementation) and a partial smoking ban among male public workers and husbands of female nonsmoking public workers. The effectiveness of smoking bans was estimated by difference-in-differences (DID) with age group stratification. The results varied considerably by age and implementation period. Although DID estimates (positive value of DID estimate represents smoking cessation percentage) for both smoking bans on total male smoking were not significant, the over-40 age group indicated a significant DID estimate of 5.0 (95% CI: 0.2, 9.8) for the recent smoking ban. For female workers' husbands' smoking, the over-40 age group indicated positive, but not significant, DID estimates for the early and recent smoking bans of 7.2 (-4.7, 19.2) and 8.4 (-2.0, 18.7), respectively. A complete indoor workplace smoking ban, particularly one recently implemented among public office workers aged over 40, may reduce male workers' smoking and female workers' husbands' smoking compared with a partial smoking ban, but the conclusion remains tentative because of methodological weaknesses in the study.

No smoking here: examining reasons for noncompliance with a smoke-free policy in a large university

INTRODUCTION

A large Australian university introduced a campuswide smoke-free policy in 2012. Almost 1 year after implementation, reasons for noncompliance among people observed smoking on campus were examined.

METHODS

Six smoking locations on campus were identified after a campuswide audit of smoking indicators (i.e., discarded cigarette butts packets and people observed smoking). At these locations, those observed smokers were interviewed. Interview responses were examined to elicit underlying themes.

RESULTS

Fifty people were seen smoking during the observation period. Those smokers interviewed comprised staff (27%) and students (73%) aged between 18 and 24 (45.9%). The majority of the students were international students (51.8%). All respondents acknowledged their awareness of the smoke-free policy. Five explanatory themes for noncompliance emerged: defiance against the policy's perceived threat to self-governance; inconvenience to travel off campus to smoke; smoking as a physiological necessity; unintentional noncompliance through unawareness or confusion of policy boundaries; and ease of avoidance of detection or exposing others to cigarette smoke.

CONCLUSIONS

Creating a culture of compliance at the university remains a significant challenge, especially considering the size of the campus, the high proportion of international students, and the logistics associated with monitoring smoking behavior in outdoor areas and on-campus student housing.