Institute for Social Marketing and Health, University of Stirling, Scotland FK9 4LA, UK.
School of Healthcare, University of Leeds, England LS2 9JT, UK.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Oct 7;17(19):7305. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17197305.
Exposure to second-hand smoke (SHS) in the home is largely associated with socio-economic disadvantage. Disadvantaged parents face specific challenges creating a smoke-free home, often caring for children in accommodation without access to outdoor garden space. Existing smoke-free home interventions largely fail to accommodate these constraints. Innovative approaches are required to address this inequality. In this two-phase study, we engaged with parents living in disadvantaged areas of Edinburgh, Scotland, to explore tailored approaches to creating a smoke-free home and develop and pilot-test an intervention based on their views and preferences. In Phase 1, qualitative interviews with 17 parents recruited from Early Years Centres explored alternative approaches to smoke-free home interventions. In Phase 2, an intervention based on parents' views and preferences was pilot-tested with parents recruited through Early Years and Family Nurse Partnership centres. Seventeen parents took part in an interview to share their views/experiences of the intervention. Data from both study phases were thematically analysed. Phase 1 findings suggested that parents associated nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) with quit attempts but supported the idea of NRT use for temporary abstinence to create a smoke-free home, viewing this as a safer option than using e-cigarettes indoors. In Phase 2, 54 parents expressed an interest in accessing NRT to create a smoke-free home, 32 discussed NRT product choice during a home visit from a smoking adviser, and 20 collected their free NRT prescription from the pharmacy. NRT was used for up to 12 weeks in the home, with ongoing advice available from pharmacy staff. During qualitative interviews ( = 17), parents self-reported successfully creating a smoke-free home, quitting smoking, and reduced cigarette consumption, often exceeding their expectations regarding changes made. The intervention was acceptable to parents, but the multi-step process used to access NRT was cumbersome. Some participants were lost to this process. Parents living in disadvantaged circumstances may benefit from access to NRT for temporary abstinence in the home to assist them to protect their children from SHS exposure. Further research using a more streamlined approach to NRT access is required to determine the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of this approach.
家庭中接触二手烟(SHS)主要与社会经济劣势有关。处于劣势地位的父母在创建无烟家庭方面面临着特殊的挑战,他们经常在没有户外花园空间的住所照顾孩子。现有的无烟家庭干预措施在很大程度上无法适应这些限制。需要创新方法来解决这种不平等。在这项两阶段研究中,我们与苏格兰爱丁堡贫困地区的父母合作,探索创建无烟家庭的定制方法,并根据他们的观点和偏好制定并试点测试一项干预措施。在第一阶段,从早期教育中心招募的 17 名父母进行了定性访谈,探讨了无烟家庭干预措施的替代方法。在第二阶段,根据父母的观点和偏好,通过早期教育和家庭护士伙伴关系中心招募父母对基于这些观点和偏好的干预措施进行试点测试。17 名父母参加了一次访谈,分享了他们对干预措施的看法/经验。对两个研究阶段的数据进行了主题分析。第一阶段的研究结果表明,父母将尼古丁替代疗法(NRT)与戒烟尝试联系在一起,但支持在创建无烟家庭时使用 NRT 进行临时戒断的想法,认为这比在室内使用电子烟更安全。在第二阶段,54 名父母表示有兴趣使用 NRT 创建无烟家庭,32 名父母在吸烟顾问家访时讨论了 NRT 产品选择,20 名父母从药房领取了免费的 NRT 处方。NRT 在家庭中使用长达 12 周,药房工作人员提供持续的建议。在定性访谈中(= 17),父母自我报告成功创建了无烟家庭、戒烟和减少香烟消费,通常超出了他们对所做改变的预期。该干预措施得到了父母的认可,但获取 NRT 的多步骤过程很繁琐。一些参与者在此过程中流失。处于劣势地位的父母可能受益于在家中使用 NRT 进行临时戒断,以帮助他们保护孩子免受 SHS 暴露。需要进一步研究使用更简化的 NRT 方法来确定这种方法的可行性和成本效益。