Legislative smoking bans for reducing secondhand smoke exposure ...

Lemstra 2008
Methods Country: Canada
Setting: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan and Canada
Design: Observational study, population based cross-sectional surveys. pre and post-ban surveys. Analysis: Paired
samples t-test. Stratification used to test for confounding by age, gender and previous MI. Analysis of hospital
admissions from age-standardised incidence rate of AMI per 100,000 population four yrs before the ban and in the
follow up one yr post-ban using incidence rate ratio and CI.
Participants Baseline survey: 1301 respondents in 2003 in Saskatoon
Follow-up survey: 1244 respondents in 2005 in Saskatoon; data on hospital admissions for AMI in Saskatoon; non-
Saskatoon residents were excluded from the analysis; stratification used to test for confounders of age, gender and
previous MI.
Interventions Legislation implemented on July 1 st 2004 in the city of Saskatoon which bans smoking or holding a lit tobacco
product in any enclosed public space including outdoor seating areas of restaurants and licensed premises.
Outcomes Smoking prevalence as measured from self-reported smoking status. Age-standardised incidence rates of hospital
admissions for AMI (using ICD-10 codes) per 100,000 population for 12 month period post-ban from 1st July 2004
to 30th June 2005 was compared with period from 1st July 2000-June 3oth 2004.
Biochemical verification: Not for smoking status or exposure to SHS
Notes Conversion from ICD-9 to ICD-10 coding occurred in April 2000. Other outcomes measured were compliance with
the smoking ban legislation.
Menzies 2006
Methods Country: Scotland.
Setting: Dundee and Perth in East Scotland.
Design: Observational study, one group, pre and post-ban tests. Analysis: Wilcoxon signed rank test or where
appropriate data logarithmically transformed before analysis.% reporting symptoms were compared with McNemar’s
χ2 test. Analysis of variance for comparisons of continuous data.
Participants Bar owners who were nonsmokers.
105 participants, 1 current smoker and 14 lost to follow up.
90 participants at 1 month post-ban. 13 lost to follow up.
77 participant at 2 months post-ban.
Cohort n = 77, Mean age (sd): 37.5 yrs (13.7), Male No. (%): 41 (53).
Missing outcome data: Non-respondents at follow up were an average of 8.7 yrs younger (95% CI 2.8 to 14.6, P =
0.004) than those who responded at follow up and had been working in a bar 3.2 yrs fewer (95% CI, -1.3 -7.7 yrs,
P =0.16).
Interventions Legislative ban implemented in Scotland on March 26th, 2006 which banned smoking in enclosed public places
including bars (Smoking, Health and Social Care (Scotland) Bill).
Outcomes Self-reported hrs of exposure per wk to SHS (workplace and home)
Self-reported presence or absence of respiratory symptoms (wheeze, shortness of breath, cough and phlegm)
Self-reported presence or absence of sensory symptoms (red or irritated eyes, painful throat and nasal itch, runny
nose, and sneeze
FEV 1 , exhaled nitric oxide, peripheral blood white cell and neutrophil count, C-reactive protein.
Biochemical verification: Yes. Serum cotinine as a measure of exposure to SHS.
Legislative smoking bans for reducing secondhand smoke exposure, smoking prevalence and tobacco consumption (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
44