Complete Home Smoking Ban Survey Analysis: An Opportunity to Improve Health Equity Among Sexual Minority Adults in California, USA

Introduction: Increasing the proportion of adults living in smoke-free homes is a US Healthy People 2020 objective. Complete home smoking bans are associated with higher odds of smoking cessation attempts and cessation duration. Sexual minority adults have disproportionality higher rates of smoking. This study investigates correlates of having a complete home smoking ban among sexual minority adults in California. Methods: Secondary data analyses of the California Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (CA BRFSS), 2014-2016. The CA BRFSS telephone survey of adults was conducted in English and Spanish and used random digit dial for landline and cell numbers. Weighted descriptive, bivariate, and multivariable logistic regression analyses were stratified by sexual orientation and biological sex.Results: Sexual minority adults in California had a lower prevalence of complete home smoking bans (Female 76.2%; Male 75.7%), higher prevalence of current cigarette smoking (Female 23.3%; Male 17.4%) and of e-cigarette use (Female 5.8%; Male 6.4%) than their straight counterparts. Sexual minorities that currently smoke “everyday” (Female AOR 0.26, 95% CI 0.11-0.63; Male AOR 0.24, 95% CI 0.01-0.56) or “somedays” (Female AOR 0.28, 95% CI 0.090.90) had lower adjusted odds of having a complete home smoking compared to those who “never smoked”. Conclusions: Currently smoking everyday was the strongest predictor of not having a complete home smoking ban among sexual minority adults. Focused efforts to increase prevalence of complete home smoking bans should address smoking status to improve health equity among sexual minority adults.

Home Smoking Bans and Urinary NNAL Levels to Measure Tobacco Smoke Exposure in Chinese American Household Pairs

Home smoking bans can reduce tobacco smoke exposure, but little is known about the impact for Chinese American household pairs. In this study of 202 household pairs with low acculturation, 53.9% reported a home smoking ban, 31.7% had inconsistent reports, and 14.4% reported no ban. With decreasing home smoking ban enforcement, more nonsmokers had tobacco smoke exposure (66.1%–86.2%) as measured by the tobacco-specific nitrosamine biomarker urine NNAL (4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol). Despite reported bans, about one-quarter of nonsmokers still reported tobacco smoke exposure at home (23.6%–30%) within the past 2 months and three-quarters reported outdoor exposure. In adjusted regression analyses of geometric mean NNAL ratios, nonsmokers in households with no ban had over two times higher levels than nonsmokers in households with a ban: adjusted log NNAL ratio = 2.70 (95% CI 1.21, 6.03). Higher smoker NNAL level and nonsmoker English fluency were also significantly associated with nonsmoker NNAL levels. Nonsmoker levels in households with an inconsistent ban were not significantly different compared to those with a ban. Although home smoking bans were generally associated with lower NNAL levels, tobacco smoke exposure in this immigrant population with low English proficiency was higher than that of the general population. From a health equity standpoint, there is a need for broader implementation and enforcement of comprehensive smoke-free policies.

Pilot Study Results from a Brief Intervention to Create Smoke-Free Homes

Very few community-based intervention studies have examined how to effectively increase the adoption of smoke-free homes. A pilot study was conducted to test the feasibility, acceptability, and short-term outcomes of a brief, four-component intervention for promoting smoke-free home policies among low-income households. We recruited forty participants (20 smokers and 20 nonsmokers) to receive the intervention at two-week intervals. The design was a pretest-posttest with follow-up at two weeks after intervention. The primary outcome measure was self-reported presence of a total home smoking ban. At follow-up, 78% of participants reported having tried to establish a smoke-free rule in their home, with significantly more nonsmokers attempting a smoke-free home than smokers (P=.03). These attempts led to increased smoking restrictions, that is, going from no ban to a partial or total ban, or from a partial to a total ban, in 43% of the homes. At follow-up, 33% of the participants reported having made their home totally smoke-free. Additionally, smokers reported smoking fewer cigarettes per day. Results suggest that the intervention is promising and warrants a rigorous efficacy trial.