Exploring Support for 100% College Tobacco-Free Policies and Tobacco-Free Campuses Among College Tobacco Users

Tobacco-free university campus policies: A systematic review

Objective: This systematic review aims to provide an update of the scientific evidence regarding tobacco-free/smoke-free campus policies (TFC/SFC), using a complex interventions approach.

PARTICIPANTS/METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases using a combination of 'tobacco-free' or 'smoke-free', 'campus', 'university or college' and 'policy' search terms on all indexed articles published up until June 2023. Studies were included if they presented research on pre-/post-implementation of TFC/SFC or policy components. Two coders extracted and synthesized the data and assessed the risk of bias.

RESULTS

A total of 113 studies were included, reporting data from 2005 to 2023 across 17 countries. The data was categorized into three of the four phases of the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework, i.e. "feasibility (n=24), "implementation" (n=34), and "evaluation" (n=69). This review finds that a policy draft, communication, enforcement strategies, and cessation services are critical policy components. TCF/SFC are effective for reducing tobacco use and secondhand smoke exposure, but they also increase vaping. Little research has investigated the effect of TFC/SFC on smokeless tobacco use.

CONCLUSION

This review addresses remaining uncertainties in evidence on the TFC/SFC implementation process. We go on to provide a series of recommendations for university administrators.

What are the effects of smoke-free and tobacco-free university campus policies, and how can they be assessed? A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This article looks at the evaluation of smoke-free (SF) and tobacco-free (TF) university campus policies that ban smoking (and often vaping) both indoors and outdoors. To assess the effectiveness of these policies, we performed a systematic literature review to answer the following questions: what is the effect of SF/TF policies on campus users' behaviors/norms/perceptions around smoking? Are the SF/TF policies an effective measure for reducing smoking among young adults? What methods and indicators can we use to assess the impact of SF/TF campus policies? What is the theoretical model underpinning the influence of SF/TF policies on the behavior of campus users?

METHODS

Three databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched over the period from January 2005 to December 2022. The article selection process included 54 articles published in scientific journals that analyzed the post-implementation impact of SF/TF campus policies. The quality of these articles was analyzed using six ad hoc indicators based on the Critical Appraisal Skills Program checklist and Joanna Briggs Institute scoping tools.

RESULTS

Most of the research on SF/TF campus policies has been conducted in the United States using quantitative methodologies. Most of these studies show that SF/TF policies reduce positive beliefs about smoking and its acceptability, influence smoking behavior (reducing smoking initiation and increasing the number of quits and quit attempts), and reduce exposure to passive smoking and pollution from cigarette butts. User acceptability of SF/TF policies is generally high. Limitations of SF/TF campus policies include difficulty for smokers to comply with them, persistence of passive smoking around campuses, and limited uptake of on-campus cessation support services provided to smokers.

DISCUSSION

The various mediating and moderating variables identified in the literature have made it possible to propose a model of the potential influence of SF/TF policy on campus users, based on the theory of planned behavior. Based on this review, we provide health professionals and higher education institutions wishing to implement a SF/TF campus policy with a set of indicators that can serve to assess the impact of a SF/TF campus policy (attitudes, acceptability, beliefs, norms, exposure to passive smoking and pollution, changes in smoking behavior).

CONCLUSION

Based on scientific evidence, the implementation of SF/TF campus policies in France is an important measure to help combat smoking in young adults.

Public support for smoke-free policies in outdoor areas and (semi-)private places: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Smoke-free policies are essential to protect people against tobacco smoke exposure. To successfully implement smoke-free policies that go beyond enclosed public places and workplaces, public support is important. We undertook a comprehensive systematic review of levels and determinants of public support for indoor (semi-)private and outdoor smoke-free policies.

Methods

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, six electronic databases were searched for studies (published between 1 January 2004 and 19 January 2022) reporting support for (semi-)private and outdoor smoke-free policies in representative samples of at least 400 respondents aged 16 years and above. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias of individual reports using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The primary outcome was proportion support for smoke-free policies, grouped according to location covered. Three-level meta-analyses, subgroup analyses and meta-regression were performed.

Findings

14,749 records were screened, of which 107 were included; 42 had low risk of bias and 65 were at moderate risk. 99 studies were included in the meta-analyses, reporting 326 measures of support from 896,016 individuals across 33 different countries. Support was pooled for indoor private areas (e.g., private cars, homes: 73%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 66-79), indoor semi-private areas (e.g., multi-unit housing: 70%, 95% CI: 48-86), outdoor hospitality areas (e.g., café and restaurant terraces: 50%, 95% CI: 43-56), outdoor non-hospitality areas (e.g., school grounds, playgrounds, parks, beaches: 69%, 95% CI: 64-73), outdoor semi-private areas (e.g., shared gardens: 67%, 95% CI: 53-79) and outdoor private areas (e.g., private balconies: 41%, 95% CI: 18-69). Subcategories showed highest support for smoke-free cars with children (86%, 95% CI: 81-89), playgrounds (80%, 95% CI: 74-86) and school grounds (76%, 95% CI: 69-83). Non-smokers and ex-smokers were more in favour of smoke-free policies compared to smokers. Support generally increased over time, and following implementation of each smoke-free policy.

Interpretation

Our findings suggested that public support for novel smoke-free policies is high, especially in places frequented by children. Governments should be reassured about public support for implementation of novel smoke-free policies.

Funding

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

Use of a Living Lab Approach to Implement a Smoke-Free Campus Policy

While universities have increasingly become tobacco-/smoke-free, to our knowledge, no campus has reported 100% policy compliance. Innovative approaches to encourage compliance and ongoing data collection are needed. This paper describes actions undertaken, framed within a Living Lab (LL) approach, to implement smoke-free campus policies in an Irish university. The action research comprised student-collected data on observed smoking on campus to evaluate adherence and compliance, first to a smoke-free zones policy (June 2016-March 2018), and then to a smoke-free campus policy (March 2019-February 2020). From June 2016-February 2020, 2909 smokers were observed. Adherence, defined as the average reduction in number of observed smokers from baseline in May 2016, reduced by 79% from 5.7 to 4.9 . Compliance, defined as the proportion of smokers who complied when reminded of the policy, was 90% (2610/2909). Additional activities included development of a broader health promotion programme; identification of a pattern of 'social smoking'; and promoting increased awareness of the environmental harms of tobacco. Ongoing policy implementation is essential for smoke-free policies and should include data collection and evaluation. Actions framed within the characteristics of a LL achieved fewer observed smokers. A LL approach is recommended to encourage policy adherence and compliance.

Korean college students’ attitudes toward a tobacco-free campus: a cross-sectional descriptive study

Purpose: A tobacco-free campus (TFC) is the most advanced tobacco-control policy for college campuses, but it has rarely been explored in Korea. This study aimed to explore Korean college students’ attitudes toward TFC and related factors.Methods: This cross-sectional descriptive study enrolled college students who were taking an elective course on smoking cessation and a healthy lifestyle at a university located in Incheon, Korea. Data were collected from March 1 to December 31, 2019 using a structured questionnaire, and study participants were recruited using convenience sampling.Results: Data on 309 college students were analyzed. Of those participants, 6.1% supported the TFC policy. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that female gender (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=5.80, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.47-22.95), taking the course to quit smoking oneself (aOR=11.03, 95% CI=1.04-117.05), anxiety in the past month (aOR=4.27, 95% CI=1.06-17.31), and being a current smoker (aOR=0.06, 95% CI=0.01-0.70) were statistically significant independent predictors of TFC support.Conclusion: Women, students taking the course to quit smoking themselves, nonsmokers, and students who felt anxious in the past month were more likely to support TFC. Further research with more representative samples is required to examine the characteristics of people who favor TFC.

The attitudes and behaviors of students, staff and faculty towards smoke-free and tobacco-free campus policies in North American universities: A narrative review

INTRODUCTION

In Canada, a series of recent public health policies and interventions have successfully led to a decline in national tobacco use rates. However, tobacco use among young adults remains high and the tobacco industry continues to place a strong marketing emphasis towards young adults on university campuses. In response, many universities across Canada are beginning to adopt smoke-free or tobacco-free campus policies. While the effectiveness of smoke-free and tobaccofree campus policies has been demonstrated in several countries, little is known about the attitudinal responses of university students, faculty and staff towards these policies. As such, we conducted a review of the literature to summarize the findings of studies conducted in North America regarding the attitudes and beliefs of campus community members towards smoke-free or tobacco-free campus policies.

METHODS

Using a pre-defined search strategy and Boolean string, we searched three databases for published articles pertaining to the research question. Only primary and peer-reviewed articles of studies conducted on North American university campuses were eligible for inclusion. Studies included for review were those published in English within the last five years. All studies included in the review contained outcome measurements related to the attitudes and behaviors of faculty, staff and students towards smoke-free and/or tobacco-free campus policies.

RESULTS

A total of 11 articles were included for analysis and result synthesis. Recent research indicates that individuals' attitudes and beliefs towards smoke-free or tobacco-free campus policies are influenced by social norms, smoking status, secondhand smoke exposure, and sociodemographics.

CONCLUSIONS

This literature review provides timely information for universities in the process of developing or implementing a smoke-free campus policy. The attitudes and beliefs of university students, faculty and staff can determine success and compliance to newly implemented smoke-free campus policies.

Development and evaluation of smoke-free or tobacco-free policies in university settings: a systematic scoping review

We conducted a systematic scoping review to map the available evidence on smoke-free or tobacco-free (SF/TF) university policies globally. We specifically looked at (i) how policies were developed and communicated and (ii) what indicators were used to evaluate their impact. We searched for peer-reviewed literature, published up to January 2020, across 10 multi-disciplinary databases. We followed a duplicate, independent data selection, and charting process. We inductively categorized the studies according to the research design and objective of 'process' and 'impact evaluation'. We identified 75 unique studies across 23 countries conducted between 1993 and 2019. Most studies were conducted in the United States (46/75, 61.3%), were based on quantitative research design and focused on impact evaluations; a third (n = 28) reported both process and impact evaluations (37.3%). Community engagement and multi-channel communication strategies were mostly used to disseminate SF/TF policies. The impact was determined by a wide range of indicators for knowledge, attitudes and behaviors related to policies. There is a mature, relevant body of literature describing the development and evaluation of SF/TF policies in universities. Future reviews could quantify the impact of the bans and may consider process indicators as moderating factors to explain the potential heterogeneity of results.

Student Experiences With Community-Based Enforcement of a Smoke-Free University

A common approach to enforcing a university smoke-free policy is through “community-based” enforcement, in which the entire campus community is responsible for asking smokers in violation to abide by the policy. The purpose of the study was to explore university students’ experiences with this strategy of enforcing a smoke-free policy. A total of 43 undergraduate students were interviewed regarding their experiences and opinions of community enforcement. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using phenomenological methods, in which six major themes emerged from the data: Fear (alarm that smokers might respond with verbal insults or physical violence), Situational (enforcing the policy depended on violators’ distance, group settings, strangers vs. peers), Protect Image (not wanting to be viewed as annoying, judgmental, or offensive), Lack of Authority (feeling a lack of authority to enforce the smoking policy), Compassion (empathy that violators smoke due to physical/emotional needs), and Enforcer (willingness to confront a policy violator). These findings reflected previous studies regarding people’s fear to ask a smoker to extinguish a cigarette, feelings of a lack of authority, and so on. The study demonstrated that using only a community-based approach to enforcement may not be a realistic responsibility to impose on an entire campus community.

An Experiment Assessing Punitive versus Wellness Framing of a Tobacco-Free Campus Policy on Students' Perceived Level of University Support

The objective of this study was to examine how different ways of describing a hypothetical tobacco-free campus policy would impact college students' perceived level of support from the college. In the spring of 2016, we randomized 1885 undergraduate students in a required course to three message conditions in an online survey: control (no message), wellness (emphasizing promoting health and quitting support), and punitive (emphasizing consequences for violating the policy). The dependent variable was perceived organizational support. We selected items previously shown to be relevant for college students (alpha = 0.92 in our data). Given significant non-normality, we used non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis tests with pairwise comparisons to examine differences in perceived organizational support across the three conditions. We examined results by smoking status and if the participant correctly reported the message they received. We found no significant difference in perceived organizational support among students exposed to different tobacco-free campus policy announcements (p = 0.75). We also found no significant difference among smokers (p = 0.66). However, among smokers who correctly reported the message they received, we found significantly lower perceived university support (p = 0.01). Messages about tobacco-free campus policies should focus on the role of policy in supporting a healthy environment instead of punitive enforcement. Campus administrators should use caution when using message frames focusing on consequences of violating newly adopted policies.

Students' Beliefs About and Perceived Effectiveness of a Tobacco-Free Campus Policy

Tobacco-free (TF) college campus policies have potential to be a high-impact tobacco control strategy. The purposes of the study presented here were to (a) determine the demographic and personal characteristics associated with students' beliefs about and perceived effectiveness of a TF campus policy and (b) assess whether tobacco use status and exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) predicted beliefs and perceived effectiveness. Five thousand randomly selected students from a large southeastern university were invited by e-mail to participate in an online survey in April 2013, three and a half years after policy implementation. Students held positive beliefs about the policy (average rating 84% of the maximum possible score). Sixty-one percent believed that the policy was successful at reducing SHS exposure; and 40% thought the policy encouraged quitting. Males were less likely than females to believe the policy was effective in reducing SHS exposure and encouraging quitting. Lower undergraduates were more likely to perceive the policy as less effective in reducing SHS exposure; international students were more likely than domestic students to perceive the policy as more effective at encouraging quitting. Students most exposed to SHS were less likely to perceive the policy was effective. Compared with nonusers, those who smoked cigarettes were less likely to perceive the policy as effective in encouraging quitting. Tailored messaging regarding policy benefits are necessary. Perceived effectiveness of TF policies may be related to compliance with the policy and should be further investigated. Objective measures of effectiveness and tobacco use behaviors are needed to fully measure the success of TF campus policies.

Attitudes of students of a health sciences university towards the extension of smoke-free policies at the university campuses of Barcelona (Spain)

OBJECTIVE

To assess attitudes towards the extension of outdoor smoke-free areas on university campuses.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study (n=384) conducted using a questionnaire administered to medical and nursing students in Barcelona in 2014. Information was obtained pertaining to support for indoor and outdoor smoking bans on university campuses, and the importance of acting as role models. Logistic regression analyses were performed to examine agreement.

RESULTS

Most of the students agreed on the importance of health professionals and students as role models (74.9% and 64.1%, respectively) although there were statistically significant differences by smoking status and age. 90% of students reported exposure to smoke on campus. Students expressed strong support for indoor smoke-free policies (97.9%). However, only 39.3% of participants supported regulation of outdoor smoking for university campuses. Non-smokers (OR=12.315; 95% CI: 5.377-28.204) and students ≥22 years old (OR=3.001; 95% CI: 1.439-6.257) were the strongest supporters.

CONCLUSIONS

The students supported indoor smoke-free policies for universities. However, support for extending smoke-free regulations to outdoor areas of university campuses was limited. It is necessary to educate students about tobacco control and emphasise their importance as role models before extending outdoor smoke-free legislation at university campuses.