Loading…

A Statewide Assessment of Smoke-Free Policy in Multiunit Housing Settings

The prevalence of smoke-free policies in multiunit housing (MUH) in South Dakota was examined. Owner beliefs about smoke-free policies were identified. Stratified random sampling included 27 South Dakota counties classified as frontier, large rural, or urban. Data collection with MUH owners in selec...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Nicotine & tobacco research 2014-12, Vol.16 (12), p.1593-1598
Main Authors: Burdette, Linda K., Rowe, Gina C., Johansen, Laurie, Kerkvliet, Jennifer L., Nagelhout, Elizabeth, Lewis, Kyle, Fahrenwald, Nancy L.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c309t-9bdefd6d9df5afbc1cfd0aaf46ab777315d119971c014bd212f5e4068d6550703
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c309t-9bdefd6d9df5afbc1cfd0aaf46ab777315d119971c014bd212f5e4068d6550703
container_end_page 1598
container_issue 12
container_start_page 1593
container_title Nicotine & tobacco research
container_volume 16
creator Burdette, Linda K.
Rowe, Gina C.
Johansen, Laurie
Kerkvliet, Jennifer L.
Nagelhout, Elizabeth
Lewis, Kyle
Fahrenwald, Nancy L.
description The prevalence of smoke-free policies in multiunit housing (MUH) in South Dakota was examined. Owner beliefs about smoke-free policies were identified. Stratified random sampling included 27 South Dakota counties classified as frontier, large rural, or urban. Data collection with MUH owners in selected counties employed a telephone survey with mailed backup. The owner response rate was 41.5% (324/780). A written smoke-free policy was reported by 175 (54.0%) owners, and 31 (10%) reported a verbal smoke-free policy. Owners in large rural counties (57.4%) had more written smoke-free policies than owners in urban (52.2%) and frontier (53.5%) counties. Only 8.5% of properties had policies covering both buildings and grounds. Owners without policies were more than twice as likely to manage U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development subsidized units and were three times as likely to be current smokers. Owners without a smoke-free policy anticipated that a policy would decrease maintenance costs but increase turnover and vacancy rates. Nearly one-half (47.9%) of owners with no smoke-free policy had previously considered implementing a policy. Owners self-reported beliefs about smoke-free policies identified perceived benefits such as decreased maintenance and costs, improved tenant safety and health, and conscientious tenants. Perceived drawbacks included increased outdoor maintenance, enforcement problems, concerns about long-term tenants who smoke, and freedom/rights of smokers. This study provides a baseline assessment of smoke-free polices in MUH settings. Perceptions of owners without smoke-free policies focused on economic concerns that were inconsistent with reports from those owners with smoke-free policies.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/ntr/ntu114
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1628241716</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26768159</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26768159</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c309t-9bdefd6d9df5afbc1cfd0aaf46ab777315d119971c014bd212f5e4068d6550703</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkF1LwzAUhoMobk5vvFdyKUI1J03S5nIM5wYThSl4V9Imkc5-zCRF9u-tdurF4T1wHl4OD0LnQG6AyPi2Ca6fDoAdoDEwISMp2evhz04jSkk8QifebwihACkcoxHlhEsm5Rgtp3gdVDCfpTZ46r3xvjZNwK3F67p9N9HcGYOf2qosdrhs8ENXhbJryoAXbefL5g2vTQh9-lN0ZFXlzdk-J-hlfvc8W0Srx_vlbLqKipjIEMlcG6uFltpyZfMCCquJUpYJlSdJEgPXAFImUBBguaZALTeMiFQLzklC4gm6Gnq3rv3ojA9ZXfrCVJVqTP9SBoKmlEECokevB7RwrffO2Gzrylq5XQYk-1aX9eqyQV0PX-57u7w2-g_9ddUDFwOw8aF1_3eRiBS4jL8A32h0uA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1628241716</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Statewide Assessment of Smoke-Free Policy in Multiunit Housing Settings</title><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><source>Oxford Journals Online</source><creator>Burdette, Linda K. ; Rowe, Gina C. ; Johansen, Laurie ; Kerkvliet, Jennifer L. ; Nagelhout, Elizabeth ; Lewis, Kyle ; Fahrenwald, Nancy L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Burdette, Linda K. ; Rowe, Gina C. ; Johansen, Laurie ; Kerkvliet, Jennifer L. ; Nagelhout, Elizabeth ; Lewis, Kyle ; Fahrenwald, Nancy L.</creatorcontrib><description>The prevalence of smoke-free policies in multiunit housing (MUH) in South Dakota was examined. Owner beliefs about smoke-free policies were identified. Stratified random sampling included 27 South Dakota counties classified as frontier, large rural, or urban. Data collection with MUH owners in selected counties employed a telephone survey with mailed backup. The owner response rate was 41.5% (324/780). A written smoke-free policy was reported by 175 (54.0%) owners, and 31 (10%) reported a verbal smoke-free policy. Owners in large rural counties (57.4%) had more written smoke-free policies than owners in urban (52.2%) and frontier (53.5%) counties. Only 8.5% of properties had policies covering both buildings and grounds. Owners without policies were more than twice as likely to manage U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development subsidized units and were three times as likely to be current smokers. Owners without a smoke-free policy anticipated that a policy would decrease maintenance costs but increase turnover and vacancy rates. Nearly one-half (47.9%) of owners with no smoke-free policy had previously considered implementing a policy. Owners self-reported beliefs about smoke-free policies identified perceived benefits such as decreased maintenance and costs, improved tenant safety and health, and conscientious tenants. Perceived drawbacks included increased outdoor maintenance, enforcement problems, concerns about long-term tenants who smoke, and freedom/rights of smokers. This study provides a baseline assessment of smoke-free polices in MUH settings. Perceptions of owners without smoke-free policies focused on economic concerns that were inconsistent with reports from those owners with smoke-free policies.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1462-2203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-994X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/ntr/ntu114</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25059499</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Data Collection - methods ; Female ; Housing - legislation &amp; jurisprudence ; Humans ; Male ; ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS ; Smoke-Free Policy - legislation &amp; jurisprudence ; Smoking - epidemiology ; Smoking - legislation &amp; jurisprudence ; Smoking Prevention ; South Dakota - epidemiology ; Tobacco Smoke Pollution - legislation &amp; jurisprudence ; Tobacco Smoke Pollution - prevention &amp; control</subject><ispartof>Nicotine &amp; tobacco research, 2014-12, Vol.16 (12), p.1593-1598</ispartof><rights>The Author 2014</rights><rights>The Author 2014. 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.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c309t-9bdefd6d9df5afbc1cfd0aaf46ab777315d119971c014bd212f5e4068d6550703</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c309t-9bdefd6d9df5afbc1cfd0aaf46ab777315d119971c014bd212f5e4068d6550703</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26768159$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26768159$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,58238,58471</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25059499$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Burdette, Linda K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rowe, Gina C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johansen, Laurie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kerkvliet, Jennifer L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nagelhout, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lewis, Kyle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fahrenwald, Nancy L.</creatorcontrib><title>A Statewide Assessment of Smoke-Free Policy in Multiunit Housing Settings</title><title>Nicotine &amp; tobacco research</title><addtitle>Nicotine Tob Res</addtitle><description>The prevalence of smoke-free policies in multiunit housing (MUH) in South Dakota was examined. Owner beliefs about smoke-free policies were identified. Stratified random sampling included 27 South Dakota counties classified as frontier, large rural, or urban. Data collection with MUH owners in selected counties employed a telephone survey with mailed backup. The owner response rate was 41.5% (324/780). A written smoke-free policy was reported by 175 (54.0%) owners, and 31 (10%) reported a verbal smoke-free policy. Owners in large rural counties (57.4%) had more written smoke-free policies than owners in urban (52.2%) and frontier (53.5%) counties. Only 8.5% of properties had policies covering both buildings and grounds. Owners without policies were more than twice as likely to manage U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development subsidized units and were three times as likely to be current smokers. Owners without a smoke-free policy anticipated that a policy would decrease maintenance costs but increase turnover and vacancy rates. Nearly one-half (47.9%) of owners with no smoke-free policy had previously considered implementing a policy. Owners self-reported beliefs about smoke-free policies identified perceived benefits such as decreased maintenance and costs, improved tenant safety and health, and conscientious tenants. Perceived drawbacks included increased outdoor maintenance, enforcement problems, concerns about long-term tenants who smoke, and freedom/rights of smokers. This study provides a baseline assessment of smoke-free polices in MUH settings. Perceptions of owners without smoke-free policies focused on economic concerns that were inconsistent with reports from those owners with smoke-free policies.</description><subject>Data Collection - methods</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Housing - legislation &amp; jurisprudence</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS</subject><subject>Smoke-Free Policy - legislation &amp; jurisprudence</subject><subject>Smoking - epidemiology</subject><subject>Smoking - legislation &amp; jurisprudence</subject><subject>Smoking Prevention</subject><subject>South Dakota - epidemiology</subject><subject>Tobacco Smoke Pollution - legislation &amp; jurisprudence</subject><subject>Tobacco Smoke Pollution - prevention &amp; control</subject><issn>1462-2203</issn><issn>1469-994X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpFkF1LwzAUhoMobk5vvFdyKUI1J03S5nIM5wYThSl4V9Imkc5-zCRF9u-tdurF4T1wHl4OD0LnQG6AyPi2Ca6fDoAdoDEwISMp2evhz04jSkk8QifebwihACkcoxHlhEsm5Rgtp3gdVDCfpTZ46r3xvjZNwK3F67p9N9HcGYOf2qosdrhs8ENXhbJryoAXbefL5g2vTQh9-lN0ZFXlzdk-J-hlfvc8W0Srx_vlbLqKipjIEMlcG6uFltpyZfMCCquJUpYJlSdJEgPXAFImUBBguaZALTeMiFQLzklC4gm6Gnq3rv3ojA9ZXfrCVJVqTP9SBoKmlEECokevB7RwrffO2Gzrylq5XQYk-1aX9eqyQV0PX-57u7w2-g_9ddUDFwOw8aF1_3eRiBS4jL8A32h0uA</recordid><startdate>20141201</startdate><enddate>20141201</enddate><creator>Burdette, Linda K.</creator><creator>Rowe, Gina C.</creator><creator>Johansen, Laurie</creator><creator>Kerkvliet, Jennifer L.</creator><creator>Nagelhout, Elizabeth</creator><creator>Lewis, Kyle</creator><creator>Fahrenwald, Nancy L.</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20141201</creationdate><title>A Statewide Assessment of Smoke-Free Policy in Multiunit Housing Settings</title><author>Burdette, Linda K. ; Rowe, Gina C. ; Johansen, Laurie ; Kerkvliet, Jennifer L. ; Nagelhout, Elizabeth ; Lewis, Kyle ; Fahrenwald, Nancy L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c309t-9bdefd6d9df5afbc1cfd0aaf46ab777315d119971c014bd212f5e4068d6550703</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Data Collection - methods</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Housing - legislation &amp; jurisprudence</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS</topic><topic>Smoke-Free Policy - legislation &amp; jurisprudence</topic><topic>Smoking - epidemiology</topic><topic>Smoking - legislation &amp; jurisprudence</topic><topic>Smoking Prevention</topic><topic>South Dakota - epidemiology</topic><topic>Tobacco Smoke Pollution - legislation &amp; jurisprudence</topic><topic>Tobacco Smoke Pollution - prevention &amp; control</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Burdette, Linda K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rowe, Gina C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johansen, Laurie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kerkvliet, Jennifer L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nagelhout, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lewis, Kyle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fahrenwald, Nancy L.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Nicotine &amp; tobacco research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Burdette, Linda K.</au><au>Rowe, Gina C.</au><au>Johansen, Laurie</au><au>Kerkvliet, Jennifer L.</au><au>Nagelhout, Elizabeth</au><au>Lewis, Kyle</au><au>Fahrenwald, Nancy L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Statewide Assessment of Smoke-Free Policy in Multiunit Housing Settings</atitle><jtitle>Nicotine &amp; tobacco research</jtitle><addtitle>Nicotine Tob Res</addtitle><date>2014-12-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>1593</spage><epage>1598</epage><pages>1593-1598</pages><issn>1462-2203</issn><eissn>1469-994X</eissn><abstract>The prevalence of smoke-free policies in multiunit housing (MUH) in South Dakota was examined. Owner beliefs about smoke-free policies were identified. Stratified random sampling included 27 South Dakota counties classified as frontier, large rural, or urban. Data collection with MUH owners in selected counties employed a telephone survey with mailed backup. The owner response rate was 41.5% (324/780). A written smoke-free policy was reported by 175 (54.0%) owners, and 31 (10%) reported a verbal smoke-free policy. Owners in large rural counties (57.4%) had more written smoke-free policies than owners in urban (52.2%) and frontier (53.5%) counties. Only 8.5% of properties had policies covering both buildings and grounds. Owners without policies were more than twice as likely to manage U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development subsidized units and were three times as likely to be current smokers. Owners without a smoke-free policy anticipated that a policy would decrease maintenance costs but increase turnover and vacancy rates. Nearly one-half (47.9%) of owners with no smoke-free policy had previously considered implementing a policy. Owners self-reported beliefs about smoke-free policies identified perceived benefits such as decreased maintenance and costs, improved tenant safety and health, and conscientious tenants. Perceived drawbacks included increased outdoor maintenance, enforcement problems, concerns about long-term tenants who smoke, and freedom/rights of smokers. This study provides a baseline assessment of smoke-free polices in MUH settings. Perceptions of owners without smoke-free policies focused on economic concerns that were inconsistent with reports from those owners with smoke-free policies.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>25059499</pmid><doi>10.1093/ntr/ntu114</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1462-2203
ispartof Nicotine & tobacco research, 2014-12, Vol.16 (12), p.1593-1598
issn 1462-2203
1469-994X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1628241716
source JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection; Oxford Journals Online
subjects Data Collection - methods
Female
Housing - legislation & jurisprudence
Humans
Male
ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS
Smoke-Free Policy - legislation & jurisprudence
Smoking - epidemiology
Smoking - legislation & jurisprudence
Smoking Prevention
South Dakota - epidemiology
Tobacco Smoke Pollution - legislation & jurisprudence
Tobacco Smoke Pollution - prevention & control
title A Statewide Assessment of Smoke-Free Policy in Multiunit Housing Settings
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T05%3A31%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20Statewide%20Assessment%20of%20Smoke-Free%20Policy%20in%20Multiunit%20Housing%20Settings&rft.jtitle=Nicotine%20&%20tobacco%20research&rft.au=Burdette,%20Linda%20K.&rft.date=2014-12-01&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=1593&rft.epage=1598&rft.pages=1593-1598&rft.issn=1462-2203&rft.eissn=1469-994X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/ntr/ntu114&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E26768159%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c309t-9bdefd6d9df5afbc1cfd0aaf46ab777315d119971c014bd212f5e4068d6550703%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1628241716&rft_id=info:pmid/25059499&rft_jstor_id=26768159&rfr_iscdi=true