278122
A rural tobacco smoke pollution study: Does co-location matter?
Methods: A sample of restaurant and bars in North Dakota meeting specific criteria were assessed for the indoor air quality indicator of PM2.5.
Results: Venues not co-located (n = 58) had significantly lower mean tobacco smoke pollution levels (equal variances not assumed, t(12.69) = -4.025, p = .002) than did co-located venues (n = 11) (GM PM2.5 = 7.4 µg/m3 and 32.1 µg/m3 respectively). Chi-square exploratory analysis of compliance by venue co-location status was significant, n = 70, Fisher's Exact test, p < .01, ϕ = -.48, with a negative large effect size.
Conclusions: Co-location of venues increased tobacco smoke pollution levels in the restaurant part of the venue that is, by law, required to be smoke free. Compliance with smoke-free laws decreased significantly in co-located venues.
Learning Areas:
Administer health education strategies, interventions and programsAdvocacy for health and health education
Implementation of health education strategies, interventions and programs
Public health or related laws, regulations, standards, or guidelines
Public health or related public policy
Public health or related research
Learning Objectives:
Describe whether the location of hospitality venues, in terms of rurality, presence of local ordinances, and socioeconomic status, influences the quantity of tobacco smoke pollution in a predominantly rural state.
Keyword(s): Tobacco Policy, Rural Health
Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: I have worked in tobacco control since 1992 and have conducted other studies related tobacco control policies.
Any relevant financial relationships? No
I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.