Department of Prevention and Community Health, Milken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington Cancer Center, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.
Georgia National Center for Disease Control and Public Health, Tbilisi, Georgia.
Eur J Public Health. 2023 Oct 10;33(5):864-871. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckad129.
Promoting smoke-free homes (SFHs) in Armenia and Georgia is timely given high smoking and secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe) rates and recent national smoke-free policy implementation. This study examined theoretical predictors (e.g. motives, barriers) of SFH status, and among those without SFHs, past 3-month SFH attempts and intent to establish SFHs in the next 3 months.
Multilevel logistic regression analyzed these outcomes using 2022 survey data from 1467 adults (31.6% past-month smokers) in Armenia (n = 762) and Georgia (n = 705). Correlates of interest included SHSe reduction behaviors and SFH motives and barriers; models controlled for country, community, age, sex, smoking status and other smokers in the home.
In this sample, 53.6% had SFHs (Armenia: 39.2%; Georgia: 69.2%). Among those without SFHs, one-fourth had partial restrictions, no smokers in the home and/or recent SFH attempts; 35.5% intended to establish SFHs; and ∼70% of multiunit housing residents supported smoke-free buildings. We documented common SHSe reduction behaviors (opening windows, limiting smoking areas), SFH motives (prevent smell, protect children/nonsmokers) and barriers (smokers' resistance). Correlates of SFHs were being from Georgia, other smokers in the home, fewer SHSe reduction behaviors, greater motives and fewer barriers. Among participants without SFHs, correlates of recent SFH attempts were other smokers in the home, greater SHSe reduction behaviors and SFH motives, and fewer barriers; correlates of SFH intentions were being female, greater SHSe reduction behaviors, greater motives, and fewer barriers.
SFH interventions should address motives, barriers and misperceptions regarding SHSe reduction behaviors. Moreover, smoke-free multiunit housing could have a great population impact.
亚美尼亚和格鲁吉亚目前正在推行无烟家庭（SFH）政策，鉴于这两个国家吸烟率和二手烟暴露率较高，以及最近出台了全国性的无烟政策，此时推行这一政策恰逢其时。本研究调查了 SFH 状况的理论预测因素（例如动机、障碍），以及在那些没有 SFH 的人中，过去 3 个月内尝试建立 SFH 的情况以及未来 3 个月内建立 SFH 的意愿。
使用 2022 年亚美尼亚（n=762）和格鲁吉亚（n=705）1467 名成年人（31.6%的人在过去一个月内吸烟）的调查数据，采用多水平逻辑回归分析了这些结果。感兴趣的相关性包括减少二手烟暴露的行为以及 SFH 的动机和障碍；模型控制了国家、社区、年龄、性别、吸烟状况和家中其他吸烟者。
在本样本中，有 53.6%的人拥有 SFH（亚美尼亚：39.2%；格鲁吉亚：69.2%）。在那些没有 SFH 的人中，四分之一的人有部分限制，家中没有吸烟者和/或最近有建立 SFH 的尝试；35.5%的人打算建立 SFH；约 70%的多单元住房居民支持无烟建筑。我们记录了常见的减少二手烟暴露的行为（打开窗户、限制吸烟区）、SFH 的动机（防止异味、保护儿童/不吸烟者）和障碍（吸烟者的抵制）。SFH 的相关因素包括来自格鲁吉亚、家中有其他吸烟者、减少二手烟暴露的行为、更大的动机和更少的障碍。在没有 SFH 的参与者中，最近尝试建立 SFH 的相关因素是家中有其他吸烟者、更多减少二手烟暴露的行为和 SFH 动机，以及更少的障碍；建立 SFH 意愿的相关因素是女性、更多减少二手烟暴露的行为、更大的动机和更少的障碍。
SFH 干预措施应针对减少二手烟暴露行为的动机、障碍和误解。此外，无烟多单元住房可能会对人群产生巨大影响。
