Braverman Marc T, Hoogesteger Lisa A, Johnson Jessica A, Aarø Leif Edvard
School of Social and Behavioral Health Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA.
Advising Services, Linn-Benton Community College, Albany, OR 97321, USA.
Prev Med. 2017 Jan;94:20-26. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.10.021. Epub 2016 Oct 23.
Many universities are adopting campus tobacco policies, but little research has explored factors influencing the choice between the policy options of smoke-free versus 100% tobacco-free. Students, faculty, and staff at a U.S. state university participated in a web-based survey in 2013, approximately one year after adoption of a smoke-free policy. Respondents who expressed support for the policy were included in an analysis to examine their opinions regarding a 100% tobacco-free policy. The samples included 4138 students and 1582 faculty/staff. Bivariate analyses and multivariate logistic regression were used to identify predictors of opposition to a tobacco-free campus. Independent variables included strength of support for a smoke-free campus, past-month tobacco use (cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, e-cigarettes, non-cigarette combustible tobacco products), campus exposure to secondhand smoke, perceptions of tobacco-related behaviors and norms, and demographics. Of these supporters of a smoke-free campus, 14.3% of students and 10.2% of faculty/staff were opposed to a tobacco-free campus. In the multivariate analyses, in both samples, smokeless tobacco use predicted opposition while smoke-free policy support and female gender predicted support. In addition, among students, current or former cigarette smoking and non-cigarette combustible tobacco use predicted opposition; international student status and secondhand smoke exposure predicted support. Among faculty/staff, age over 55 predicted support. Future research should examine why current and former smokers might oppose policies restricting non-combustible tobacco products, even when they support smoke-free policies. In policy planning, campus administrators should communicate actual tobacco usage levels. International students who do not use tobacco may be a source of policy support.
许多大学都在采用校园烟草政策,但很少有研究探讨影响无烟政策与100%无烟草政策这两种政策选择的因素。2013年,一所美国州立大学的学生、教师和工作人员参与了一项基于网络的调查,此时距离无烟政策实施约一年。表示支持该政策的受访者被纳入一项分析,以考察他们对100%无烟草政策的看法。样本包括4138名学生和1582名教职员工。采用双变量分析和多变量逻辑回归来确定反对无烟草校园政策的预测因素。自变量包括对无烟校园的支持力度、过去一个月的烟草使用情况(香烟、无烟烟草、电子烟、非香烟可燃烟草制品)、校园二手烟暴露情况、对烟草相关行为和规范的认知以及人口统计学特征。在这些无烟校园的支持者中,14.3%的学生和10.2%的教职员工反对无烟草校园政策。在多变量分析中,在两个样本中,无烟烟草使用预测了反对态度,而对无烟政策的支持和女性性别预测了支持态度。此外,在学生中,当前或曾经吸烟以及使用非香烟可燃烟草制品预测了反对态度;国际学生身份和二手烟暴露预测了支持态度。在教职员工中,55岁以上的年龄预测了支持态度。未来的研究应该考察为什么当前和曾经吸烟的人可能会反对限制非可燃烟草制品的政策,即使他们支持无烟政策。在政策规划中,校园管理人员应该传达实际的烟草使用水平。不使用烟草的国际学生可能是政策支持的一个来源。