Socioeconomic variation in the prevalence, introduction, retention, and removal of smoke-free policies among smokers: findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey.
Socioeconomic variation in the prevalence, introduction, retention, and removal of smoke-free policies among smokers: findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey.
复制标题
DOI：
10.3390/ijerph8020411
复制
发表时间：
2011-02
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Cummings KM
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
King BA;Hyland AJ;Borland R;McNeill A;Cummings KM
接触二手烟会导致非吸烟者过早死亡和患病，室内无烟政策在全球范围内变得越来越普遍。尽管在烟草使用和戒烟方面存在社会经济差异，但社会经济地位 (SES) 与无烟政策之间的关联研究较少。数据来自 2006 年和 2007 年国际烟草控制四国调查 (ITC-4)，这是一项针对加拿大、美国、英国和澳大利亚具有全国代表性的吸烟者样本的前瞻性研究。 2006 年 10 月至 2007 年 2 月期间，对 8,245 名当前和曾经的成年吸烟者进行了电话访谈。2007 年 9 月至 2008 年 2 月期间，对 5,866 名受访者进行了重新访谈。自我报告的教育程度和家庭年收入被用来创建社会经济地位三分位数。结果包括家庭、工作场所、酒吧和餐馆无烟政策的存在、引入和取消。与低 SES 吸烟者相比，高 SES 吸烟者 [OR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.27–2.87] 和全面禁止在家吸烟 [OR: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.04–2.13] 的几率更高。社会经济地位高的持续吸烟者解除全面禁令的几率也降低[OR：0.44，95% CI：0.26–0.73]。社会经济地位与工作场所、酒吧或餐馆禁令的存在或引入之间没有观察到一致的关联。随着社会经济地位的提高，无烟家庭的存在、引入和保留也随之增加，但工作场所、酒吧或餐馆全面禁烟的存在或引入并不存在一致的社会经济变化。减少无烟家庭社会经济地位差异的机会是存在的，而公共工作场所、酒吧和餐馆无烟政策缺乏社会经济差异，表明这些措施现在在这四个国家得到了公平的分配。
Exposure to secondhand smoke causes premature death and disease in non-smokers and indoor smoke-free policies have become increasingly prevalent worldwide. Although socioeconomic disparities have been documented in tobacco use and cessation, the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and smoke-free policies is less well studied. Data were obtained from the 2006 and 2007 Waves of the International Tobacco Control Four Country Survey (ITC-4), a prospective study of nationally representative samples of smokers in Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia. Telephone interviews were administered to 8,245 current and former adult smokers from October 2006 to February 2007. Between September 2007 and February 2008, 5,866 respondents were re-interviewed. Self-reported education and annual household income were used to create SES tertiles. Outcomes included the presence, introduction, and removal of smoke-free policies in homes, worksites, bars, and restaurants. Smokers with high SES had increased odds of both having [OR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.27–2.87] and introducing [OR: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.04–2.13] a total ban on smoking in the home compared to low SES smokers. Continuing smokers with high SES also had decreased odds of removing a total ban [OR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.26–0.73]. No consistent association was observed between SES and the presence or introduction of bans in worksites, bars, or restaurants. The presence, introduction, and retention of smoke-free homes increases with increasing SES, but no consistent socioeconomic variation exists in the presence or introduction of total smoking bans in worksites, bars, or restaurants. Opportunities exist to reduce SES disparities in smoke-free homes, while the lack of socioeconomic differences in public workplace, bar, and restaurant smoke-free policies suggest these measures are now equitably distributed in these four countries.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
5.2
作者：
Borland, R.;Yong, H-H;Fong, G. T.
通讯作者：
Fong, G. T.
影响因子：
4.7
作者：
Hyland, Andrew;Higbee, Cheryl;Cummings, K. Michael
通讯作者：
Cummings, K. Michael
影响因子：
3.2
作者：
Layte, Richard;Whelan, Christopher T.
通讯作者：
Whelan, Christopher T.
影响因子：
--
作者：
Haw, Sally J.;Gruer, Laurence
通讯作者：
Gruer, Laurence
DOI：
10.1097/jom.0b013e318188b90a
发表时间：
2008-12-01
影响因子：
3.2
作者：
Arheart, Kristopher L.;Lee, David J.;Erard, Michael J.
通讯作者：
Erard, Michael J.