Home Smoke-Free Policies as Children Age: Urban, Rural, and Suburban Differences.

Autor:	Mantey DS; UT Health Science Center at Houston, UT Health, School of Public Health in Austin, 1616 Guadalupe, Suite 6.300, Austin, TX 78701, USA., Omega-Njemnobi O; UT Health Science Center at Houston, UT Health, School of Public Health in Austin, 1616 Guadalupe, Suite 6.300, Austin, TX 78701, USA., Hunt ET; UT Health Science Center at Houston, UT Health, School of Public Health in Austin, 1616 Guadalupe, Suite 6.300, Austin, TX 78701, USA., Lanza K; UT Health Science Center at Houston, UT Health, School of Public Health in Austin, 1616 Guadalupe, Suite 6.300, Austin, TX 78701, USA., Cristol B; UT Health Science Center at Houston, UT Health, School of Public Health in Austin, 1616 Guadalupe, Suite 6.300, Austin, TX 78701, USA., Kelder SH; UT Health Science Center at Houston, UT Health, School of Public Health in Austin, 1616 Guadalupe, Suite 6.300, Austin, TX 78701, USA.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco [Nicotine Tob Res] 2022 Nov 12; Vol. 24 (12), pp. 1985-1993.
DOI:	10.1093/ntr/ntac186
Abstrakt:	Introduction: Parents/guardians can effectively reduce tobacco smoking and secondhand smoke exposure among youth by adopting and enforcing rules against indoor tobacco smoking (ie, home smoke-free policies). We investigate home smoke-free policies from childhood to adolescence in the United States and across rural, suburban, and urban households. Aims and Methods: We analyzed 2019-2020 National Survey of Children's Health data from n = 5,955 parents of youth aged 0-17, living at home with a tobacco smoker in the United States (U.S). Geographical categories were: rural, suburban, and urban. Home smoke-free policy reflected prohibiting tobacco smoking inside the home. Weighted logistic regressions examined the (1) association between youth age and home smoke-free policies, (2) interaction between geographic category and youth age, and (3) differing associations between youth age and home smoke-free policies by geography. Models controlled for youth race, ethnicity, sex, parental education, household annual income, and home structure. Results: Approximately 13.2% of U.S. households with a smoker did not have a home smoke-free policy. Stratified analyses found one-year increase in youth age was associated with lower odds of having a home smoke-free policy in rural (aOR:0.91; 95%CI: 0.87-0.95) and urban (aOR: 0.96; 95%CI: 0.92-1.00; p = .039), but not suburban (aOR:1.00; 95%CI: 0.95-1.05) households, controlling for covariates. Conclusion: Odds of having a smoke-free home in the U.S. declined significantly in rural (9% per year) and urban (4%) but not suburban (0%) households. We quantify declines in home smoke-free policies as children age and identify geographic disparities for this environmental determinant of health. Implications: Health promotion efforts targeting secondhand smoke prevention is needed, particularly for parents of older youth. Furthermore, there is a clear geographic bias in secondhand smoke exposure among all youth particularly older youth. Tailored interventions are needed to address geographic disparities in secondhand smoke exposure among rural and urban youth. (© The Author(s) 2022. 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