Cargando…
Did Smokefree Legislation in England Reduce Exposure to Secondhand Smoke among Nonsmoking Adults? Cotinine Analysis from the Health Survey for England
BACKGROUND: On 1 July 2007, smokefree legislation was implemented in England, which made virtually all enclosed public places and workplaces smokefree. OBJECTIVES: We examined trends in and predictors of secondhand smoke exposure among nonsmoking adults to determine whether exposure changed after th...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3295343/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22169225 http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1103680 |
_version_ | 1782225555138019328 |
---|---|
author | Sims, Michelle Mindell, Jennifer S. Jarvis, Martin J. Feyerabend, Colin Wardle, Heather Gilmore, Anna |
author_facet | Sims, Michelle Mindell, Jennifer S. Jarvis, Martin J. Feyerabend, Colin Wardle, Heather Gilmore, Anna |
author_sort | Sims, Michelle |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: On 1 July 2007, smokefree legislation was implemented in England, which made virtually all enclosed public places and workplaces smokefree. OBJECTIVES: We examined trends in and predictors of secondhand smoke exposure among nonsmoking adults to determine whether exposure changed after the introduction of smokefree legislation and whether these changes varied by socioeconomic status (SES) and by household smoking status. METHODS: We analyzed salivary cotinine data from the Health Survey for England that were collected in 7 of 11 annual surveys undertaken between 1998 and 2008. We conducted multivariate regression analyses to examine secondhand smoke exposure as measured by the proportion of nonsmokers with undetectable levels of cotinine and by geometric mean cotinine. RESULTS: Secondhand smoke exposure was higher among those exposed at home and among lower-SES groups. Exposure declined markedly from 1998 to 2008 (the proportion of participants with undetectable cotinine was 2.9 times higher in the last 6 months of 2008 compared with the first 6 months of 1998 and geometric mean cotinine declined by 80%). We observed a significant fall in exposure after legislation was introduced—the odds of having undetectable cotinine were 1.5 times higher [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.3, 1.8] and geometric mean cotinine fell by 27% (95% CI: 17%, 36%) after adjusting for the prelegislative trend and potential confounders. Significant reductions were not, however, seen in those living in lower-social class households or homes where smoking occurs inside on most days. CONCLUSIONS: We found that the impact of England’s smokefree legislation on secondhand smoke exposure was above and beyond the underlying long-term decline in secondhand smoke exposure and demonstrates the positive effect of the legislation. Nevertheless, some population subgroups appear not to have benefitted significantly from the legislation. This finding suggests that these groups should receive more support to reduce their exposure. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3295343 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2011 |
publisher | National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-32953432012-03-26 Did Smokefree Legislation in England Reduce Exposure to Secondhand Smoke among Nonsmoking Adults? Cotinine Analysis from the Health Survey for England Sims, Michelle Mindell, Jennifer S. Jarvis, Martin J. Feyerabend, Colin Wardle, Heather Gilmore, Anna Environ Health Perspect Research BACKGROUND: On 1 July 2007, smokefree legislation was implemented in England, which made virtually all enclosed public places and workplaces smokefree. OBJECTIVES: We examined trends in and predictors of secondhand smoke exposure among nonsmoking adults to determine whether exposure changed after the introduction of smokefree legislation and whether these changes varied by socioeconomic status (SES) and by household smoking status. METHODS: We analyzed salivary cotinine data from the Health Survey for England that were collected in 7 of 11 annual surveys undertaken between 1998 and 2008. We conducted multivariate regression analyses to examine secondhand smoke exposure as measured by the proportion of nonsmokers with undetectable levels of cotinine and by geometric mean cotinine. RESULTS: Secondhand smoke exposure was higher among those exposed at home and among lower-SES groups. Exposure declined markedly from 1998 to 2008 (the proportion of participants with undetectable cotinine was 2.9 times higher in the last 6 months of 2008 compared with the first 6 months of 1998 and geometric mean cotinine declined by 80%). We observed a significant fall in exposure after legislation was introduced—the odds of having undetectable cotinine were 1.5 times higher [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.3, 1.8] and geometric mean cotinine fell by 27% (95% CI: 17%, 36%) after adjusting for the prelegislative trend and potential confounders. Significant reductions were not, however, seen in those living in lower-social class households or homes where smoking occurs inside on most days. CONCLUSIONS: We found that the impact of England’s smokefree legislation on secondhand smoke exposure was above and beyond the underlying long-term decline in secondhand smoke exposure and demonstrates the positive effect of the legislation. Nevertheless, some population subgroups appear not to have benefitted significantly from the legislation. This finding suggests that these groups should receive more support to reduce their exposure. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences 2011-12-12 2012-03 /pmc/articles/PMC3295343/ /pubmed/22169225 http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1103680 Text en http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ Publication of EHP lies in the public domain and is therefore without copyright. All text from EHP may be reprinted freely. Use of materials published in EHP should be acknowledged (for example, ?Reproduced with permission from Environmental Health Perspectives?); pertinent reference information should be provided for the article from which the material was reproduced. Articles from EHP, especially the News section, may contain photographs or illustrations copyrighted by other commercial organizations or individuals that may not be used without obtaining prior approval from the holder of the copyright. |
spellingShingle | Research Sims, Michelle Mindell, Jennifer S. Jarvis, Martin J. Feyerabend, Colin Wardle, Heather Gilmore, Anna Did Smokefree Legislation in England Reduce Exposure to Secondhand Smoke among Nonsmoking Adults? Cotinine Analysis from the Health Survey for England |
title | Did Smokefree Legislation in England Reduce Exposure to Secondhand Smoke among Nonsmoking Adults? Cotinine Analysis from the Health Survey for England |
title_full | Did Smokefree Legislation in England Reduce Exposure to Secondhand Smoke among Nonsmoking Adults? Cotinine Analysis from the Health Survey for England |
title_fullStr | Did Smokefree Legislation in England Reduce Exposure to Secondhand Smoke among Nonsmoking Adults? Cotinine Analysis from the Health Survey for England |
title_full_unstemmed | Did Smokefree Legislation in England Reduce Exposure to Secondhand Smoke among Nonsmoking Adults? Cotinine Analysis from the Health Survey for England |
title_short | Did Smokefree Legislation in England Reduce Exposure to Secondhand Smoke among Nonsmoking Adults? Cotinine Analysis from the Health Survey for England |
title_sort | did smokefree legislation in england reduce exposure to secondhand smoke among nonsmoking adults? cotinine analysis from the health survey for england |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3295343/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22169225 http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1103680 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT simsmichelle didsmokefreelegislationinenglandreduceexposuretosecondhandsmokeamongnonsmokingadultscotinineanalysisfromthehealthsurveyforengland AT mindelljennifers didsmokefreelegislationinenglandreduceexposuretosecondhandsmokeamongnonsmokingadultscotinineanalysisfromthehealthsurveyforengland AT jarvismartinj didsmokefreelegislationinenglandreduceexposuretosecondhandsmokeamongnonsmokingadultscotinineanalysisfromthehealthsurveyforengland AT feyerabendcolin didsmokefreelegislationinenglandreduceexposuretosecondhandsmokeamongnonsmokingadultscotinineanalysisfromthehealthsurveyforengland AT wardleheather didsmokefreelegislationinenglandreduceexposuretosecondhandsmokeamongnonsmokingadultscotinineanalysisfromthehealthsurveyforengland AT gilmoreanna didsmokefreelegislationinenglandreduceexposuretosecondhandsmokeamongnonsmokingadultscotinineanalysisfromthehealthsurveyforengland |