21.03.2013 Views

Legislative smoking bans for reducing secondhand smoke exposure ...

Legislative smoking bans for reducing secondhand smoke exposure ...

Legislative smoking bans for reducing secondhand smoke exposure ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Akhtar 2007 (Continued)<br />

Outcomes Self-reported <strong>exposure</strong> to SHS in the home, cafes or restaurants, buses or trains, indoor leisure facility or someone<br />

else’s home.<br />

Biochemical verification: Yes; Exposure to SHS measured by geometric mean saliva cotinine concentration.<br />

Notes Parental <strong>smoking</strong> was reported by children in both baseline and follow-up surveys. Pupils with saliva cotinine >15ng/<br />

ml were considered active <strong>smoke</strong>rs and were excluded from analysis.<br />

Alcouffe 1997<br />

Methods Country: France<br />

Setting: Employees in small and medium sized workplaces in Paris<br />

Design: Observational study, pre and post-ban tests.<br />

Participants Total population: 27,228 employees in 3261 firms. 12,170 office staff<br />

Baseline: 572 employees of which 120 office staff<br />

Follow up at 2 yrs: 200 office staff<br />

Interventions French Tobacco ban law in November 1st 1992 which prohibited <strong>smoking</strong> in small and medium sized firms in Paris.<br />

Outcomes Self-reported <strong>smoking</strong> status<br />

Biochemical verification: No<br />

Notes<br />

Allwright 2005<br />

Methods Country: Ireland<br />

Setting: Pubs in Ireland (Dublin, Cork and Galway) and Northern Ireland (NI) (Derry, Limavady and Strabane)<br />

Design: Quasi-experimental, pre- and post-ban tests. Analysis: Compared paired differences using Wilcoxon signed<br />

rank test or McNemar’s χ2 test <strong>for</strong> bivariate analysis and non-paired differences using Wilcoxon rank sum test.<br />

Analyses of changes within pairs were restricted to participants who responded to baseline and follow-up surveys,<br />

remained employed in a bar and didn’t change their <strong>smoking</strong> status.<br />

Participants 329 bar workers recruited at baseline (288 ROI and 41 in NI). Total ineligible: 48 (40 were no longer in the bar<br />

trade, 7 moved, 1 died). Lost to follow up: 23 uncontactable; 9 refused.<br />

Follow-up rate 89% (220/248) of those eligible or 76% overall in Rep of Ireland<br />

Follow-up rate 88% (29/33) of those eligible or 71% in NI<br />

Analysis restricted 158 (138 ROI and 20 in NI) who were non<strong>smoke</strong>rs at baseline and follow up<br />

Age: 45.5 yrs (35.0-54.9) <strong>for</strong> Republic of Ireland & 36.1 yrs (20.9-43.8) <strong>for</strong> NI, P value

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!