Barrientos-Gutiérrez T, Reynales-Shigematsu LM, Gimeno D, Lazcano-Ponce E

Language: Spanish
References: 23
Page: 315-322
PDF size: 171.27 Kb.

ABSTRACT

This essay tries o develop classification criteria to identify smoke-free spaces using environmental monitoring, direct inspection and worker reports, comparing their agreement and deriving a proposal useful for the epidemiological surveillance of environmental tobacco smoke. Environmental nicotine monitoring, direct inspections and worker’s surveys regarding tobacco smoke presence were conducted in ten institutions. For each method, criteria were defined to classify institutions as smoke-free spaces. Results were compared to evaluate between-methods agreement. Good agreement between environmental monitoring and direct inspections were observed, although they disagreed in 20% of the cases. Worker reports were too frequent to discriminate. Combining environmental monitoring and inspection would provide the most sensitive classification. Cost-effectiveness studies are required to identify the best strategy.

REFERENCES

1. World Health Organization. WHO framework convention on tobacco control (WHO FCTC). Geneva: WHO, 2003.

2. Antuñano FJL. Firma y ratificación del Convenio Marco para el Control del Tabaco, de la Organización Mundial de la Salud. Salud Publica Mex 2004;46:273.

3. US Department of Health and Human Services. The health consequences of Involuntary Exposure to tobacco smoke: A report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, 2006.

4. Environmental Protection Agency. Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and Other Disorders. US Department of Health and Human Services, 1993.

5. World Health Organization. Policy recommendations on protection from exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke. Geneva: WHO, 2007.

6. Cámara de Senadores de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos. Ley General para el Control del Tabaco, México, 2008. Gaceta Oficial del Senado de la República 2008;198:115-123.

7. Alpert HR, Carpenter CM, Travers MJ, Connolly GN. Environmental and economic evaluation of the Massachusetts smoke-free workplace law. J Community Health 2007;32:269-281.

8. Heloma A, Jaakkola MS. Four-year follow-up of smoke exposure, attitudes and smoking behaviour following enactment of Finland’s national smoke-free work-place law. Addiction 2003;98:1111.

9. Borland R, Yong HH, Siahpush M, et al. Support for and reported compliance with smoke-free restaurants and bars by smokers in four countries: Findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) four country survey. Tob Control 2006;15(suppl 3):iii34-iii41.

10. Weber M, Bagwell D, Fielding J, Glantz S. Long term compliance with California’s smoke-free workplace law among bars and restaurants in Los Angeles county. Br Med J 2003;12:269.

11. Nagle AL, Schofield MJ, Redman S. Smoking on hospital grounds and the impact of outdoor smoke-free zones. Tob Control 1996;5:199-204.

12. Edwards R, Bullen C, O’Dea D, Thomson G, Waa A, Wilson N. After the smoke has cleared: Evaluation of the impact of a new smoke-free law. Tob Control 2008;17:2.

13. Abrams SM, Mahoney MC, Hyland A, Cummings KM, Davis W, Song L. Early evidence on the effectiveness of clean indoor air legislation in New York State. Am J Public Health 2006;96:296-298.

14. Williams A, Peterson E, Knight S, Hiller M, Pelletier A. Survey of restaurants regarding smoking policies. J Public Health Manag Pract 2004;10:35-40.

15. Leaderer BP, Hammond SK. Evaluation of vapor-phase nicotine and respirable suspended particle mass as markers for environmental tobacco smoke. Environ Sci Technol 1991;25:770-777.

16. Guerin MR, Jenkins RA, Tomkins BA. The Chemistry of Environmental Tobacco Smoke: Composition and Measurement. CRC Press, 2000.

17. Hammond SK, Leaderer BP. A diffusion monitor to measure exposure to passive smoking. Environ Sci Technol 1987;21:494-497.

18. Barrientos-Gutierrez T, Valdés-Salgado R, Reynales-Shigematsu LM, Navas-Acien A, Lazcano Ponce EC. Exposición involuntaria al humo de tabaco en lugares públicos de la ciudad de México. Salud Publica Mex 2007;43:S205-S212.

19. Goodman P, Agnew M, McCaffrey M, Paul G, Clancy L. Effects of the Irish smoking ban on respiratory health of bar workers and air quality in Dublin pubs. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2007;175:840-845.

20. Chan CC, Chen YC, Wang JD. Comparison of questionnaires, cigarette butt counts, and nicotine concentration measurements in predicting schoolchildren nicotine exposure. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 1994;53:254-258.

21. Coghlin J, Hammond SK, Gann PH. Development of epidemiologic tools for measuring environmental tobacco smoke exposure. Am J Epidemiol 1989;130:696-704.

22. Woodward A, Al-Delaimy W. Measures of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. Validity, precision, and relevance. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1999;895:156-172.

23. Gooding M, McAllister I. Evaluating compliance with Australia’s first smoke-free public places legislation. Tob Control 1997;6:326-331.