217844 Smoke-free homes: Effect of a community based health promotion program in the Dominican Republic

Monday, November 8, 2010 : 8:30 AM - 8:45 AM

Ann M. Dozier, RN, PhD , Community and Preventive Medicine/Social and Behavioral Medicine, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY
Deborah J. Ossip, PhD , Community and Preventive Medicine/Social and Behavioral Medicine, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY
Sergio Diaz, MD , Proyecto Doble T, Centro de Atencion Primaria JUan XXIII, Santiago, Dominican Republic
Joseph J. Guido, MS , Community and Preventive Medicine/Social and Behavioral Medicine, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY
Essie Sierra-Torres, MPH , McNair Scholars Program, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY
Zahira Quiñones, MD, MPH , Pontificia Universidad Catolica Madre y Maestra, Santiago, Dominican Republic
Scott McIntosh, PhD , Community and Preventive Medicine/Social and Behavioral Medicine, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY
Susan Fisher, PhD , Community and Preventive Medicine/Division Public Health, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY
Background. Increasing prevalence of households with smoking bans is central to reducing passive smoke exposure. A community based trial assessed the effect of a community tobacco cessation intervention on smoking bans among Dominican Republic communities, historically a tobacco-growing country with few tobacco control regulations. Methods. Baseline (2004) and two post-intervention (2006, 2007) surveillance surveys (each wave n >1000 randomly selected households) conducted in six economically disadvantaged communities (three tobacco-growing; community type: two each urban, peri-urban, rural) assessed household demographics, health status and smoking restrictions. The multi-faceted intervention included raising community awareness about health effects and providing cessation resources and support to smokers but nothing specific to establishing household bans. Results. Prevalence of household smoking bans increased in both intervention and control communities (24% to 45%). Households with smokers (vs. those without) adopted bans at lower rates (6 to 17%; 35 to 58%). Logistic regression analyses among households without smokers, showed good model fit. Allowing household smoking was associated with tobacco-growing community (AdjustedOR(95%CI): 3.77 (2.73-5.22)), household member with a cardiovascular problem (1.71(1.22-2.40)) and being Catholic (1.84(1.19-2.86)). The model differed by community type. Child or household member with a respiratory condition were not retained in the model. Conclusions. Increases occurred in both intervention and control communities (possibly due to surveillance process). For communities early in tobacco control, small measures may lead to significant increases in household bans, particularly among non-smoking households. Tobacco-growing community and possibly lack of knowledge of smoking's health effects may mitigate against household smoking bans in households with smokers.

Learning Areas:
Conduct evaluation related to programs, research, and other areas of practice
Implementation of health education strategies, interventions and programs
Public health or related education
Public health or related research

Learning Objectives:
Describe methodologies to assess the establishment of household smoking bans Explain impact of community smoking cessation initiative on household smoking bans

Keywords: Tobacco Control, International Public Health

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: I am a published researcher in this topic area. I supervised the analyses being presented.
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.