Recall and Effectiveness of Messages Promoting Smoke-Free Policies in Rural Communities

A systematic review of second-hand smoking mass media campaigns (2002-2022)

BACKGROUND

Second-hand smoking (SHS) increases the risk of chronic disease in adults and poses a serious health threat to children. Mass media campaigns are instrumental in raising awareness and reducing SHS exposure. There is a need to identify recent SHS mass media campaigns and assess their sustainability in terms of knowledge, attitudes, and behavioural changes. This systematic review summarises the characteristics and outcomes of mass media campaigns on SHS prevention.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and grey literature were searched in November 2022 for SHS campaigns implemented between 2016 and 2022. The eligibility criteria included campaigns on the dangers or effects of SHS with any target group, dissemination medium, study design, or language. The database search identified 1,413 peer-reviewed titles, of which 82 full-texts were screened, with 14 meeting the eligibility criteria. The grey literature search identified 9,807 sources, of which 61 were included. We extracted data on the campaign characteristics, metrics, and smoking-related outcomes. The JBI critical appraisal tool was used to assess the risk of bias of the included studies.

RESULTS

We found 73 SHS campaigns conducted between 2002 and 2022, across 50 countries. The campaigns reached 378 million people. The reported recall rates range from 8 to 76%. Of the 11 studies that reported smoking-related outcomes, 10 reported increased knowledge in understanding SHS risks (73-85%), five reported an increased prevalence of smoke-free homes, and two reported an increase in number of participants persuading others to quit smoking. Two studies reported a decrease in overall smoking, whereas three studies observed a reduction in smoking in the presence of children.

CONCLUSION

The available data provide some support for the effectiveness of SHS campaigns in reducing smoking behaviours in homes and around children. However, the certainty of evidence was low due to the lack of a control group and the substantial heterogeneity in the outcomes assessed. Future campaigns need comprehensive evaluation and reporting to reduce publication bias.

Understanding and addressing populations whose prior experience has led to mistrust in healthcare

BACKGROUND

Policy makers need to maintain public trust in healthcare systems in order to foster citizen engagement in recommended behaviors and treatments. The importance of such commitment has been highlighted by the recent COVID-19 pandemic. Central to public trust is the extent of the accountability of health authorities held responsible for long-term effects of past treatments. This paper addresses the topic of manifestations of trust among patients damaged by radiation treatments for ringworm.

METHODS

For this mixed-methods case study (quan/qual), we sampled 600 files of Israeli patients submitting claims to the National Center for Compensation of Scalp Ringworm Victims in the years 1995-2014, following damage from radiation treatments received between 1946 and 1960 in Israel and/or abroad. Qualitative data were analyzed with descriptive statistics, and correlations were analyzed with chi-square tests. Verbal data were analyzed by the use of systematic content analysis.

RESULTS

Among 527 patients whose files were included in the final analysis, 42% held authorities responsible. Assigning responsibility to authorities was more prevalent among claimants born in Israel than among those born and treated abroad (χ² = 6.613, df = 1, p = 0.01), claimants reporting trauma (χ² = 4.864, df = 1, p = 0.027), and claimants living in central cities compared with those in suburban areas (χ² = 18.859, df = 6, p < 0.01). Men, younger claimants, patients with a psychiatric diagnosis, and patients from minority populations expressed mistrust in health regulators.

CONCLUSIONS

Examining populations' perceived trust in healthcare institutions and tailoring health messages to vulnerable populations can promote public trust in healthcare systems.

Impact of population tobacco control interventions on socioeconomic inequalities in smoking: a systematic review and appraisal of future research directions

BACKGROUND

While price increases and targeted cessation support have been found to reduce inequalities in smoking by socioeconomic status (SES), evidence on other measures is mixed. We aimed to update the most recent (2014) previous review by identifying and appraising evidence published since 2013 on the equity impact of population tobacco control measures.

METHODS

Systematic searching of 10 electronic databases and hand-searching of four key journals identified 68 primary research articles published since 2013 that sought to examine the equity impact of population tobacco control measures in high-income countries with a negative socioeconomic gradient in smoking. Reported equity impacts were categorised as positive (greater impact among lower SES), neutral (no difference by SES), negative (greater impact among higher SES) or mixed/unclear.

RESULTS

There was substantial growth in research seeking to evaluate the equity impact of tobacco control interventions, but the majority of new studies showed mixed/unclear results. Findings for price increases and targeted cessation support continue to suggest an equity-positive impact, but limitations in the available evidence make further assessment difficult. Substantial differences in the context, scale and implementation of tobacco control policies make straightforward comparison of findings from the previous 2014 and current reviews problematic.

CONCLUSION

Researchers need to adopt more sophisticated, multidisciplinary approaches in evaluating the equity impact of tobacco control measures-developing robust measures of equity effect and using frameworks that take account of context, existing systems/processes and the likely mechanisms of action. Socioeconomic differences in intervention impact within low-income and middle-income countries require evaluation.

Disparities in Rural Tobacco Use, Smoke-Free Policies, and Tobacco Taxes

Tobacco use and exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) remain leading causes of preventable disease, disability, and mortality in the United States. Rural populations are among those being left behind in the recent declining smoking rates and have become a focus of discussions on tobacco-related disparities. This article describes tobacco-related disparities in rural populations including tobacco use, exposure to SHS, smoke-free policies, and tobacco taxes. Nurses, as social justice and tobacco control policy advocates, are needed especially at the local level, where much of the policy work occurs and where nursing's voice is respected and can be powerful.

Key Factors Inhibiting Legislative Progress Toward Smoke-Free Coverage in Appalachia

The Appalachian Region has among the highest rates of smoking and smoking-related illness in the United States. Strong smoke-free legislation could help protect nonsmoking residents from the harmful effects of secondhand smoke. However, there is a dearth of state, county, city, and subcounty smoke-free law coverage throughout Appalachia. As of July 2016, only 21% of Appalachian residents were covered by comprehensive smoke-free laws (i.e., 100% coverage for workplaces, restaurants, and bars). Only 46% of Appalachians lived in places with 100% smoke-free workplace laws, only 30% lived in places with 100% smoke-free restaurant laws, and only 29% lived in places with 100% smoke-free bar laws. Reasons for this lack of smoke-free law coverage include socioeconomic disadvantage, the historical importance of tobacco in Appalachian economies, and preemptive state legislation. By understanding the contextual issues that have inhibited smoke-free legislation, smoke-free advocates will be better prepared to lead efforts that expand smoke-free coverage in this region.