Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Prev Med. 2018 Nov;116:157-165. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2018.09.014. Epub 2018 Sep 24.

Variations in support for secondhand smoke restrictions across diverse rural regions of the United States.

Author information

1
NORC at the University of Chicago, United States of America. Electronic address: Stillman-Frances@norc.org.
2
NORC at the University of Chicago, United States of America.
3
Ohio State University, United States of America.

Abstract

Significant disparities exist between rural-urban U.S.

POPULATIONS:

Besides higher smoking rates, rural Americans are less likely to be protected from SHS. Few studies focus across all regions, obscuring regional-level differences. This study compares support for SHS restrictions across all HHS regions.

DATA:

2014/15 TUS-CPS; respondents (n = 228,967): 47,805 were rural residents and 181,162 urban. We examined bi-variates across regions and urban-rural adjusted odds ratios within each. Smoking inside the home was assessed along with attitudes toward smoking in bars, casinos, playgrounds, cars, and cars with kids. Urban respondents were significantly more supportive of all SHS policies: (e.g. smoking in bars [57.9% vs. 51.4%]; support for kids in cars [94.8% vs. 92.5%]. Greatest difference between urban-rural residents was in Mid-Atlantic (bar restrictions) and Southeast (home bans): almost 10% less supportive. Logistic regression confirmed rural residents least likely, overall, to support SHS in homes (OR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.74, 0.81); in cars (OR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.79, 0.95), on playgrounds (OR = 0.88, 95% CI.83, 0.94) and in bars OR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.85, 0.92), when controlling for demographics and smoking status. South Central rural residents were significantly less likely to support SHS policies-home bans, smoking in cars with kids, on playgrounds, in bars and casinos; while Heartland rural residents were significantly more supportive of policies restricting smoking in cars, cars with kids and on playgrounds. Southeast and South Central had lowest policy score with no comprehensive state-level SHS policies. Understanding differences is important to target interventions to reduce exposure to SHS and related health disparities.

KEYWORDS:

Disparities; Policy; Rural; Secondhand smoke; TUS-CPS; Tobacco control

PMID:
30261241
DOI:
10.1016/j.ypmed.2018.09.014
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center