Smoke-Free Home Intervention in Permanent Supportive Housing: A Multifaceted Intervention Pilot.

Autor:	Durazo A; Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San Francisco, CA., Hartman-Filson M; Division of General Internal Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA., Perez K; School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, CA., Alizaga NM; Humanities and Social Sciences, Cañada College, Redwood City, CA., Petersen AB; School of Nursing, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA., Vijayaraghavan M; Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San Francisco, CA.; Division of General Internal Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco [Nicotine Tob Res] 2021 Jan 07; Vol. 23 (1), pp. 63-70.
DOI:	10.1093/ntr/ntaa043
Abstrakt:	Introduction: Smoke-free homes (SFHs), the voluntary adoption of home smoking restrictions, are associated with reduced secondhand smoke exposure. However, SFHs are uncommon in permanent supportive housing (PSH) for formerly homeless adults, who have fivefold higher smoking rates than the general population. We pilot-tested a brief intervention to increase voluntary adoption of SFHs among PSH residents in the San Francisco Bay Area. Aims and Methods: We pilot-tested a brief intervention to increase voluntary adoption of SFHs among PSH residents in the San Francisco Bay Area. Rest of the methods, PSH residents (n = 100) and staff (n = 62) from 15 PSH sites participated in the intervention between October 2017 and February 2018. Research staff provided counseling to PSH residents on how to adopt an SFH and trained PSH staff on how to counsel residents on smoking cessation. The primary outcome was self-reported voluntary adoption of an SFH for ≥90 days, and the secondary outcome was carbon monoxide-verified PPA at 6-month follow-up. PSH staff completed the Smoking Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices survey at baseline and 3-month follow-up. Results: At 6 months, 31.3% of PSH residents had adopted an SFH (vs. 13.0% at baseline) and 16.9% reported carbon monoxide-verified PPA. A positive attitude toward an SFH policy was associated with increased odds of SFH adoption (adjusted odds ratio = 8.68, 95% confidence interval: 2.42, 31.17). Voluntary SFH adoption was associated with increased PPA (adjusted odds ratio = 26.27, 95% confidence interval: 3.43, 201.30). PSH staff reported improved attitudes toward and self-efficacy in delivering cessation care, and decreased barriers to discussing smoking cessation among PSH residents between baseline and 3-month follow-up. Conclusions: In this single-arm study, a brief intervention increased SFH adoption and PPA among PSH residents. Implications: To date, few interventions have addressed SFHs and their association with tobacco use among PSH residents. A "ground-up" approach that relies on buy-in from residents and that promotes voluntary SFHs is an innovative way to increase smoke-free living environments in PSH. This approach could pave a pathway for smoke-free policy implementation in these sites. PSH can play a role in reducing the burden of tobacco use by empowering its residents to adopt voluntary SFHs, which could increase smoking cessation among residents. (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved.For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu