|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
1 School of Health and Social Studies, University of Warwick, UK
2 Department of Medical and Social Care Education, University of Leicester, UK
Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Professor N Spencer
School of Health and Social Studies, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK; n.j.spencer{at}warwick.ac.uk
Aims: To study the relation between the use of parent reported home smoking bans and smoke exposure among children aged 1830 months.
Methods: A total of 309 smoking households with children aged 1830 months, who were part of the Coventry Cohort study, consented to participate in this cross-sectional survey.
Results: Although parents in almost 88% of smoking households reported using harm reduction strategies to protect their toddlers from smoke exposure, only 13.9% reported smoking bans in the house. Mean log urinary cotinine:creatinine ratio was significantly lower for those children whose parents reported no smoking in the house (1.11, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.49) compared with none/less strict strategies (1.87, 95% CI 1.64 to 2.10). In linear regression models fitted on log cotinine:creatinine ratio, no smoking in the house was independently associated with a significant reduction in cotinine:creatinine ratio (B = 0.55, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.20) after adjusting for mothers and partners average daily cigarette consumption, housing tenure, and overcrowding. The final model accounted for 44.3% of the variance.
Conclusions: Not smoking in the house was associated with a reduction in mean urinary cotinine:creatinine ratio in children aged 1830 months; the relation persisted after adjustment for levels of mothers and partners daily cigarette consumption and sociodemographic factors. Results suggest that home smoking bans in this age group have a small but significant effect on smoke exposure independent of levels of parental tobacco consumption.
Keywords: harm reduction; smoke exposure; smoking ban; toddler
Related Article
Arch. Dis. Child. 2005 90: 661-662.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J. P. Winickoff, E. R. Park, B. J. Hipple, A. Berkowitz, C. Vieira, J. Friebely, E. A. Healey, and N. A. Rigotti Clinical Effort Against Secondhand Smoke Exposure: Development of Framework and Intervention Pediatrics, August 1, 2008; 122(2): e363 - e375. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Robinson and A. J. Kirkcaldy 'Imagine all that smoke in their lungs': parents' perceptions of young children's tolerance of tobacco smoke Health Educ. Res., December 20, 2007; (2007) cym080v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
State-Specific Prevalence of Smoke-Free Home Rules--United States, 1992-2003 JAMA, July 11, 2007; 298(2): 169 - 170. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R Stanwick Canada gets its house in order Inj. Prev., October 1, 2005; 11(5): 259 - 260. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Minerva BMJ, July 16, 2005; 331(7509): 168 - 168. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M Hovell and J Daniel Defining residential tobacco home policies: a behavioural and cultural perspective Arch. Dis. Child., July 1, 2005; 90(7): 661 - 662. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS | REGISTER |
| ARCH DIS CHILD | FETAL NEONATAL ED | ED PRACTICE |