Does support for smoke-free outdoor spaces increase after implementation?: A case study of a Dutch research center's smoke-free campus transition

Support for regulating smoking in private and public places by adults who currently smoke and recently quit smoking in Spain

INTRODUCTION

While indoor smoking restrictions are common, outdoor restrictions are still rare. We explored opinions and support for regulating smoking in different indoor and outdoor environments among adults who smoke and those who recently quit smoking, in Spain.

METHODS

The 2021 ITC EUREST-PLUS Spain Survey is a cross-sectional study conducted among a nationally representative sample of 1006 adults aged ≥18 years who smoked cigarettes (n=867) or had recently quit smoking (n=139). Using Poisson regression with robust variance, we estimated adjusted prevalence and prevalence ratios of favorable opinions on regulating smoking in different indoor and outdoor environments and support for regulation in unregulated outdoor environments, by sociodemographic and smoking-related characteristics.

RESULTS

There were highly favorable opinions for regulating smoking in places with minors (>95% in primary and secondary playgrounds, and cars with pre-school children and minors) and outdoor transportation (60-80%). There were less favorable opinions for regulating smoking in outdoor terraces of bars/pubs and restaurants (15-20%). Support for further total outdoor regulations on smoking was moderate for markets/shopping centers, public building entrances and swimming pools (40-60%), and low for restaurants/bars/pubs (29.2%). Having quit smoking, having no significant others who smoke and/or believing that cigarette smoke is harmful to others, were factors positively associated with favorable opinions and support for regulating smoking.

CONCLUSIONS

The settings in Spain with the most favorable opinions for regulation among adults who smoke and have recently quit smoking are places with minors, private cars with others and outdoor areas of public transportation, while the settings with the least favorable opinions were outdoor terraces of bars, pubs, and restaurants. Support for further total outdoor smoking bans is generally moderate, but low for restaurants, bars, and pubs. Overall, these findings suggest the feasibility of extending smoke-free policies to other public and private settings to protect others from tobacco smoke exposure.

Secondhand smoke exposure in public outdoor spaces in the Netherlands: The stronger the smell, the more exposure to nicotine

INTRODUCTION

While secondhand smoke exposure in outdoor spaces has been investigated before, no data on outdoor secondhand smoke exposure have been collected in the Netherlands. Such data could help policymakers gain support for smoke-free outdoor public spaces.

METHODS

Between May and November 2021, we visited 25 outdoor locations across the Netherlands. At each location, we conducted four measurements with smokers and one measurement without smokers. During each measurement, we counted the number of smokers present and we rated tobacco smell intensity on a five-point scale. Airborne nicotine and 3-ethenylpyridine (3-EP) data were collected through active sampling on thermal desorption tubes. The contents of these tubes were later analyzed using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Using linear mixed models, we investigated the association between levels of nicotine and the presence of smokers, the number of smokers, and the intensity of tobacco smell. We also investigated these association with levels of 3-EP.

RESULTS

Nicotine levels were higher when smokers were present (B=1.40; 95% CI: 0.69-2.11, p<0.001). For each additional smoker present, we measured higher levels of nicotine (B=0.23; 95% CI: 0.10-0.37, p=0.001). When the smell of tobacco smoke was noted to be stronger by the researchers, higher levels of nicotine were measured through sampling (B=0.85; 95% CI: 0.44-1.26, p<0.001). We found similar results for 3-EP levels.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that both nicotine and 3-EP are useful in quantifying levels of secondhand smoke in various outdoor locations. The level of nicotine exposure outdoors was positively associated with the number of smokers nearby. The intensity of the tobacco smell was also related to nicotine exposure: the stronger the smell of tobacco smoke, the more nicotine was measured in the air.

Passive exposure and perceptions of smoke-free policies in hospital and university campuses among nursing students: A cross-sectional multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

Outdoor smoke-free regulations reduce exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) and help to denormalize tobacco use. As future key agents in health promotion, nursing students' attitudes should agree with tobacco-control policies. The objectives of this study were: 1) assess nursing students' exposure to SHS in nursing schools, 2) explore their perceptions of compliance with the existing smoke-free regulations in acute-care hospitals; and 3) describe their support for indoor and outdoor smoking bans on hospital and university campuses.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional multicenter study conducted in 2015-2016 in all 15 university nursing schools in Catalonia, Spain. A questionnaire gathered information on SHS exposure, awareness of the smoke-free regulation in acutecare hospitals, and support for smoke-free policies in indoor and outdoor areas of hospitals and university campuses. Participants were nursing students attending classes on the day of the survey. We performed descriptive analyses and calculated adjusted prevalence ratios (APR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Of 4381 respondents, 99.1% had seen people smoking in outdoor areas of their university campus, and 75.2% had been exposed to SHS on the campus (6.0% indoors and 69.2% outdoors). Nearly 60% were aware of the smoking regulation in place in acute-care hospitals. There was widespread support for smoke-free indoor hospital regulation (98.7%), but less support (64.8%) for outdoor regulations. Approximately 33% supported the regulation to make outdoor healthcare campuses smoke-free, which was higher among third-year students compared to first-year students (APR=1.41; 95% CI: 1.24-1.62), among never smokers (41.4%; APR=2.84; 95% CI: 2.21-3.64) compared to smokers, and among those who were aware of the regulation (38.4%; 95% CI: 1.37-1.75).

CONCLUSIONS

Exposure to SHS on university campuses is high. Nursing students express low support for strengthening outdoor smoking bans on hospital and university campuses. Interventions aiming to increase their support should be implemented.

Outdoor smoking as a nuisance to non-smokers: The case for smoke-free outdoor public spaces in dense urban areas

INTRODUCTION

Despite the growing number of smoke-free spaces, many non-smokers continue to be involuntarily exposed to secondhand smoke outdoors and on public streets. Both theory and research suggest that people living in densely populated urban areas are more likely to smoke than those living in less densely populated areas. Consequently, non-smokers in densely populated urban areas might be more likely to be exposed and feel annoyed by secondhand smoke outdoors. We investigated whether the extent to which non-smokers feel annoyed by secondhand smoke exposure in outdoor public spaces is related to urban population density.

METHODS

We used cross-sectional survey data from the Netherlands 'Module Substance Use' survey (2020 data, n=9375). This is a nationally representative sample of the adult population in the Netherlands. Using logistic regression models, we investigated whether urban population density predicts both smoking and non-smokers' annoyance to secondhand smoke exposure outdoors.

RESULTS

We found that smoking rates were associated with urban population density. In the Netherlands, people living in extremely population-dense urban areas were more likely to smoke than those living in non-urban areas (AOR=1.59; 95% CI: 1.25-2.02, p<0.001). Feeling annoyed by secondhand smoke outdoors was also associated with urban population density: non-smokers living in extremely population-dense urban areas were more likely to be annoyed than respondents living in non-urban areas (AOR=1.65; 95% CI: 1.34-2.02, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

These cross-sectional data highlight the importance of comprehensive local tobacco control policy programs that include creating smoke-free outdoor public spaces. This need for such smoke-free outdoor public spaces might be particularly strong in densely populated areas.