1 Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
2 Department of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Am J Health Promot. 2019 Jan;33(1):107-117. doi: 10.1177/0890117118776090. Epub 2018 May 17.
As public housing agencies and other low-income housing providers adopt smoke-free policies, data are needed to inform implementation approaches that support compliance.
Focused ethnography used including qualitative interviews with staff, focus groups with residents, and property observations.
Four low-income housing properties in Massachusetts, 12 months postpolicy adoption.
Individual interviews (n = 17) with property staff (managers, resident service coordinators, maintenance, security, and administrators) and focus groups with resident smokers (n = 28) and nonsmokers (n = 47).
Informed by the social-ecological model: intrapersonal, interpersonal, organizational, and community factors relating to compliance were assessed.
Utilized MAXQDA in a theory-driven immersion/crystallization analytic process with cycles of raw data examination and pattern identification until no new themes emerged.
Self-reported secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe) was reduced but not eliminated. Challenges included relying on ambivalent maintenance staff and residents to report violations, staff serving as both enforcers and smoking cessation counsellors, and inability to enforce on nights and weekends. Erroneous knowledge of the policy, perception that SHSe is not harmful to neighbors, as well as believing that smokers were losing their autonomy and being unfairly singled out when other resident violations were being unaddressed, hindered policy acceptance among resident smokers. The greatest challenge to compliance was the lack of allowable outdoor smoking areas that may have reduced the burden of the policy on smokers.
Smoke-free policy implementation to support compliance could be enhanced with information about SHSe for smokers and nonsmokers, cessation support from external community partners, discussion forums for maintenance staff, resident inclusion in decision-making, and framing the policy as part of a broader wellness initiative.
随着公共住房机构和其他低收入住房提供者采用无烟政策,需要数据来为支持合规的实施方法提供信息。
采用重点人种学方法,包括对工作人员的定性访谈、居民焦点小组和物业观察。
马萨诸塞州的四个低收入住房物业,在政策采用后 12 个月。
与物业工作人员(经理、居民服务协调员、维护、安全和管理人员)进行个人访谈(n = 17),并对居民吸烟者(n = 28)和不吸烟者(n = 47)进行焦点小组讨论。
根据社会生态模型:评估了与合规相关的个人、人际、组织和社区因素。
利用 MAXQDA 在理论驱动的沉浸式/结晶分析过程中,对原始数据进行循环检查和模式识别,直到没有新的主题出现。
报告的二手烟暴露(SHSe)有所减少但并未消除。挑战包括依赖态度矛盾的维护人员和居民报告违规行为,工作人员既是执行者又是戒烟顾问,以及无法在夜间和周末执行。对政策的错误认识、认为 SHSe 对邻居没有危害,以及认为吸烟者正在失去自主权,并在其他居民违规行为未得到处理时受到不公平的关注,这些都阻碍了居民吸烟者对政策的接受。对合规性的最大挑战是缺乏允许的户外吸烟区,这可能减轻了对吸烟者的政策负担。
为了支持合规性,实施无烟政策可以通过向吸烟者和不吸烟者提供有关 SHSe 的信息、来自外部社区合作伙伴的戒烟支持、为维护人员提供讨论论坛、让居民参与决策以及将政策作为更广泛的健康倡议的一部分来增强。