nach oben

Cancer Causes & Control

Erschienen in:

01.01.2011 | Brief report

Secondhand smoke exposure in bars and restaurants in Guatemala City: before and after smoking ban evaluation

verfasst von: Joaquin Barnoya, Mariel Arvizu, Miranda R. Jones, Juan C. Hernandez, Patrick N. Breysse, Ana Navas-Acien

Erschienen in: Cancer Causes & Control | Ausgabe 1/2011

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objective

In February 2009, Guatemala implemented a comprehensive smoking ban. We assessed air nicotine levels in bars and restaurants 6 months after the ban (post-ban) and compared them with levels found in 2006 (pre-ban).

Methods

Exposure was estimated by passive sampling of vapor-phase nicotine using samplers (n = 50) placed for 7 working days in 10 bars and 11 restaurants in Guatemala City. Air nicotine was measured by gas chromatography, and the time-weighted average concentration in μg/m³ was estimated. Employees answered a survey about smoke-free workplaces (n = 32) and compared with pre-ban (n = 37) results.

Results

Nicotine was detectable in all bars pre- and post-ban. In restaurants, it was detectable in all pre- and 73% post-ban. Median nicotine concentrations in bars significantly decreased from 4.58 μg/m³ (IQR, 1.71, 6.45) pre-ban to 0.28 μg/m³ (IQR 0.17, 0.66) post-ban (87% decrease). In restaurants, concentrations significantly decreased from 0.58 μg/m³ (IQR, 0.44, 0.71) to 0.04 μg/m³ (IQR 0.01, 0.11) (95% decrease). Employees’ support for a smoke-free workplace increased in the post-ban survey (from 32 to 81%, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Six months after the implementation of a smoke-free law in Guatemala, nicotine levels were significantly decreased in bars and restaurants and workers’ support for the law substantially increased.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (USDHHS) (2006) The health consequences of involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke: a report of the surgeon general. U.S. Department of Health and Humand Services. Atlanta, GA

Conference of the parties to the WHO FCTC (2003) WHO framework convention on tobacco control. World Health Organization, Geneva, 2003. Available from: http://www.who.int/fctc/text_download/en/index.html. Accessed Sept 30, 2010

Barnoya J, Glantz S (2004) Association of the California tobacco control program with declines in lung cancer incidence. Cancer Causes Control 15(7):689–695CrossRefPubMed

Jemal A, Cokkinides VE, Shafey O et al (2003) Lung cancer trends in young adults: an early indicator of progress in tobacco control (United States). Cancer Causes Control 14(6):579–585CrossRefPubMed

IOM (Institute of Medicine) (2010) Secondhand smoke exposure and cardiovascular effects: making sense of the evidence. IOM, Washington, DC

Callinan JE, Clarke A, Doherty K et al (2010) Legislative smoking bans for reducing secondhand smoke exposure, smoking prevalence and tobacco consumption. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4:CD005992PubMed

Menzies D, Nair A, Williamson PA et al (2006) Respiratory symptoms, pulmonary function, and markers of inflammation among bar workers before and after a legislative ban on smoking in public places. JAMA 296(14):1742–1748CrossRefPubMed

Corrao MA GG, Sharme N, Shookoohi DF (eds) (2000) Tobacco control country profiles. American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA

Barnoya J, Mendoza-Montano C, Navas-Acien A (2007) Secondhand smoke exposure in public places in Guatemala: comparison with other Latin American countries. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 16(12):2730–2735CrossRefPubMed

10.

Gutierrez D (2008) Prevencion y control de tabaco. Libre Encuentro. Guatemala, November 2008. Televised debate. Duration: 1 hour

11.

Larra M (2008) Humo de impacto. Prensa Libre. Junio 1: 10–11

12.

Menocal C, Osorio J (2006) Espacios libres de tabaco. Prensa Libre. Agosto 13: 2–3

13.

Argueta C (2008) Los Efectos del Humo. Exposición en centros publicos. Nuestro Diario. Enero 25:24–45

14.

Tabacalera Centro Americana SA, Philip Morris International (2008) Comentarios sobre la iniciativa de ley 3309: “Ley de la creación de ambientes libres de humo de tabaco.”

15.

Muggli ME, Lockhart NJ, Ebbert JO et al (2010) Legislating tolerance: Spain’s national public smoking law. Tob Control 19(1):24–30CrossRefPubMed

16.

Hammond S (1993) Evaluating exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. In: Winegar E, Keith L (eds) Sampling and analysis of airborne pollutants. Lewis Publishers, Florida

17.

Stillman FA, Hantula DA, Swank R (1994) Creating a smoke-free hospital: attitudes and smoking behaviors of nurses and physicians. Am J Health Promot 9(2):108–114PubMed

18.

Mulcahy M, Evans DS, Hammond SK et al (2005) Secondhand smoke exposure and risk following the Irish smoking ban: an assessment of salivary cotinine concentrations in hotel workers and air nicotine levels in bars. Tob Control 14(6):384–388CrossRefPubMed

19.

Semple S, Creely KS, Naji A et al (2007) Secondhand smoke levels in Scottish pubs: the effect of smoke-free legislation. Tob Control 16(2):127–132CrossRefPubMed

20.

Blanco-Marquizo A, Goja B, Peruga A et al (2010) Reduction of secondhand tobacco smoke in public places following national smoke-free legislation in Uruguay. Tob Control 19(3):231–234CrossRefPubMed

21.

Erazo M, Iglesias V, Droppelmann A et al (2010) Secondhand tobacco smoke in bars and restaurants in Santiago, Chile: evaluation of partial smoking ban legislation in public places. Tob Control. Online first doi:10.1136/tc.2009.035402

22.

Gorini G, Moshammer H, Sbrogio L et al (2008) Italy and Austria before and after study: second-hand smoke exposure in hospitality premises before and after 2 years from the introduction of the Italian smoking ban. Indoor Air 18(4):328–334CrossRefPubMed

23.

Lopez MJ, Nebot M, Albertini M et al (2008) Secondhand smoke exposure in hospitality venues in Europe. Environ Health Perspect 116(11):1469–1472CrossRefPubMed

24.

Pursell L, Allwright S, O’Donovan D et al (2007) Before and after study of bar workers’ perceptions of the impact of smoke-free workplace legislation in the Republic of Ireland. BMC Public Health 7:131CrossRefPubMed

25.

Tang H, Cowling DW, Stevens CM et al (2004) Changes of knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and preference of bar owner and staff in response to a smoke-free bar law. Tob Control 13(1):87–89CrossRefPubMed

26.

Thrasher JF, Perez-Hernandez R, Swayampakala K et al (2010) Policy support, norms, and secondhand smoke exposure before and after implementation of a comprehensive smoke-free law in Mexico city. Am J Public Health 100(9):1789–1798CrossRefPubMed

27.

Thrasher JF, Besley JC, Gonzalez W (2010) Perceived justice and popular support for public health laws: a case study around comprehensive smoke-free legislation in Mexico City. Soc Sci Med 70(5):787–793CrossRefPubMed

28.

Thrasher JF, Boado M, Sebrie EM et al (2009) Smoke-free policies and the social acceptability of smoking in Uruguay and Mexico: findings from the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project. Nicotine Tob Res 11(6):591–599CrossRefPubMed

29.

Chavarria A (2010) Cumplimiento de la ley de ambientes libres de humo de tabaco en Guatemala. Tésis de graduación. Medicina, Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala. Personal communication. Sept 2, 2010

Titel: Secondhand smoke exposure in bars and restaurants in Guatemala City: before and after smoking ban evaluation
verfasst von: Joaquin Barnoya
Mariel Arvizu
Miranda R. Jones
Juan C. Hernandez
Patrick N. Breysse
Ana Navas-Acien
Publikationsdatum: 01.01.2011
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Cancer Causes & Control / Ausgabe 1/2011
Print ISSN: 0957-5243
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7225
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-010-9673-8

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Umsetzung der POMGAT-Leitlinie läuft

03.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Seit November 2023 gibt es evidenzbasierte Empfehlungen zum perioperativen Management bei gastrointestinalen Tumoren (POMGAT) auf S3-Niveau. Vieles wird schon entsprechend der Empfehlungen durchgeführt. Wo es im Alltag noch hapert, zeigt eine Umfrage in einem Klinikverbund.

Springer Medizin

Secondhand smoke exposure in bars and restaurants in Guatemala City: before and after smoking ban evaluation