Smoke-Free Home and Vehicle Policies Among Community College Smokers

• Published in: Health education & behavior 2018-08, Vol.45 (4), p.540-549
• Main Authors: Ossip, Deborah J., Johnson, Tye, Assibey-Mensah, Vanessa, Wang, Sijiu, McLaren, Donald, Calabro, Karen, Prokhorov, Alexander V., McIntosh, Scott
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; At Risk Persons; Bans; Barriers; Changing Tobacco Norms; Children; College Students; Colleges & universities; Community Colleges; Family Environment; Female; Health Behavior; Health Surveys; High risk; Humans; Incidence; Intervention; Male; Motor Vehicles; Negative Attitudes; New York - epidemiology; No-smoking policies; Parents; Passive smoking; Policy; Prevalence; Regression analysis; Regression models; Roommates; Siblings; Smoke; Smoke-Free Policy; Smokers - statistics & numerical data; Smoking; Smoking - epidemiology; Statistical Analysis; Student Characteristics; Student Surveys; Students; Tobacco; Tobacco smoke; Tobacco Smoke Pollution - prevention & control; Tobacco Smoke Pollution - statistics & numerical data; Two Year College Students; Universities; Vehicles; Young Adult
• ISSN: 1090-1981; 1552-6127
• DOI: 10.1177/1090198117742437

Background. Personal smoke-free policies (home and vehicle) reduce secondhand smoke exposure, improve health, and increase quitting among smokers. Overall, 83.0% and 78.1% of Americans report smoke-free homes and vehicles, respectively. However, little is known about such policies among 2-year community college (CC) students, who represent a large, diverse population with higher smoking rates and less negative attitudes toward smoking than 4-year college students. Methods. Prevalence of, and factors associated with, personal smoke-free policies were examined for 2,475 CC smokers enrolled in a national trial of web-assisted tobacco intervention. Results. Few students had smoke-free home policies (20.7%), smoke-free vehicles (17.0%), both smoke-free home and vehicle policy (4.2%), or any policy (home or vehicle; 31.2%). In logistic regression models, having children was associated with a smoke-free home or any policy but not with a smoke-free vehicle, and among participants who had children, only 20% reported a smoke-free home, and only 15% had a smoke-free vehicle. In addition, not living with other smokers, living with parents or roommates/siblings (vs. alone), smoking later than 30 minutes after awakening, believing that smoking affects the health of others, and confidence in quitting were associated with presence of a smoke-free home or any policy; no variables were significantly associated with presence of a smoke-free vehicle. Conclusions. CC students represent a priority population for intervention regarding smoke-free homes and vehicles. Such intervention can decrease exposure of others, including children, and potentially increase the likelihood of quitting in this high-risk population.