Exposure to Tobacco Smoking in Vehicles, Indoor, and Outdoor Settings in Germany: Prevalence and Associated Factors.

Little is known on whether secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure in vehicles, indoor, and outdoor settings is similarly patterned in terms of different socio-epidemiological indicators in Germany. This study aims to estimate the current national-level prevalence and associated socio-epidemiological indicators of SHS exposure in vehicles, indoor, and outdoor settings in the German population, using current data from a representative household survey. We used cross-sectional data (N = 3928 respondents aged 14-99 years) from two waves of the DEBRA survey (German Study on Tobacco Use), conducted between January and March 2020. The reported prevalence of SHS exposure during the last seven days was 19% in vehicles, 25% in indoor settings, and 43% in outdoor settings. We found that younger age and current smoking were consistently associated with higher SHS exposure. Furthermore, people with low education were more likely to be exposed to SHS in vehicles and indoor settings than people with high education. This study found that the prevalence of SHS exposure in vehicles, indoor, and outdoor settings is a relevant feature of everyday life in Germany, especially for younger people and people with lower education, leading to potentially persistent socioeconomic and tobacco-attributable inequalities in morbidity and mortality.

The association between migration and smoke-free families: how do migrants from different world regions compare?

BACKGROUND: Studies on adolescent secondhand smoke exposure within the family often dichotomously operationalize migration background without paying attention to social and cultural diversity within migrant populations. As a result, little is known about variation within migrant groups in smoke-free family environments (SFFEs). This study analyses the association between SFFEs and parental migration from different world regions. METHODS: Data from 14- to 16-year-old adolescents (N = 17 144) on SFFEs and parental migration were obtained from cross-sectional repeated SILNE-R surveys. A multivariable multinomial regression was applied, presenting relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for maternal or paternal tobacco smoking and home smoking bans. Variation in migration background was measured according to parental sex and place of birth. RESULTS: Approximately 18% of adolescents are exposed to maternal smoking, and 25% are exposed to paternal smoking. Almost half of the respondents do not live in SFFEs but are subject to permissive (5%) or partial (39%) smoking bans at home. We found that adolescents of Eastern European descent are at a higher risk of being exposed to both paternal and maternal smoking. A sex difference in parental smoking was found among Arabic/Islamic migrants, where mothers are less likely to be smokers. Maternal and paternal African origins are associated with prohibitive smoking bans at home. Eastern European mothers show higher odds of permissiveness and freely allowing smoking at home. CONCLUSION: Notable within-differences according to parental sex and place of birth were found for SFFEs and should be taken into account when implementing equity-sensitive tobacco prevention programs.

[The association between school tobacco policies and the perceived smoking prevalence of adolescents]. / Der Zusammenhang zwischen schulischer Tabakkontrolle und der wahrgenommenen Raucherprävalenz Jugendlicher.

BACKGROUND: In the German context, there is hardly any quantitative data about the implementation of school tobacco polices that include the perspective of both teachers and students. The aim of the study is to investigate the associations between implemented school tobacco policies and the perceived prevalence of smoking at the level of school staff and adolescents. METHODS: The repeated cross-sectional study (2013 and 2017) is based on pooled responses of 13- to 17-year-old adolescents (N = 2393) and school staff (N = 85) from 25 schools located in the West German metropolitan region of Hanover. In linear regression models, average marginal effects (AMEs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI95%) and robust standard errors for perceived tobacco prevalence are reported separately for school tobacco policies assessed by teachers and students (scale 0-6). All models were controlled for sociodemographic, school-, and smoking-specific covariates. RESULTS: On average, adolescents perceive a smoking prevalence of 30% ([Formula: see text]; s: 24.0) for their school. A comprehensive school tobacco policy is consistently associated with lower school smoking prevalence both from the point of view of teachers (AME: -3.54 CI95% -6.49 to -0.58) and students (AME: -1.69 CI95% -2.52 to -0.86). The number of smoking friends (e.g., "most of them are smokers" +14%: AME: 14.13 CI95% 10.46 to 17.80) and the type of school are the most relevant determinants of a high school smoking prevalence. School types with a nonacademic track report a 15% (AME: 15.03 CI95% 10.13 to 19.93) higher prevalence compared to grammar schools. DISCUSSION: Progressive school tobacco control policies should focus more on school types with nonacademic tracks, certain groups at risk, and those schools that do not strictly enforce school tobacco policies.

The effect of school smoke-free policies on smoking stigmatization: A European comparison study among adolescents.

The increasing denormalization of smoking by tobacco control policies and a normative smoke-free climate may shift power towards adolescent non-smokers. It is unclear, however, how common stigmatization of smokers is among adolescents or how stigmatization relates to the denormalization of smoking in their school and social environment. This paper aims to measure (1) whether stigmatization among European adolescents varies according to smoking status and socioeconomic position (SES), and (2) whether stigmatization is greater in school environments in which smoking is denormalized (i.e. those with low smoking rates and strong school tobacco policies). Data on 12,991 adolescents were collected in 55 schools in seven European countries (SILNE R-survey, 2016/17). We applied Stuber's adapted scale of perceived stereotyping and discrimination towards smokers to smoking status and five variables indicating a power shift towards non-smokers: the school's tobacco control policy (STP) score, the percentage of adolescents in the school who smoke, parents' level of education, students' academic performance, and the percentage of their friends who smoke. Multilevel regressions were applied to the global score for perceived stigmatization. Discrimination against smokers and stereotyping of smokers were frequently reported. Smokers reported less 'perceived stigmatization of smoking' than non-smokers (Beta = -0.146, p < 0.001). High-SES students reported stereotyping and discrimination more frequently than lower-SES students. The perception of stigmatization was lower among students whose academic performance was poor (Beta = -0.070, p < 0.001) and among those who had friends who smoked (Beta = -0.141, p < 0.001). Stigmatization was lower in schools with greater exposure to smoking and was not associated with the school's STP score. Perceived stigmatization of smoking is common among European adolescents. Smokers themselves, however, perceive stigmatization less often than non-smokers. Strong school tobacco policies do not increase stigmatization, but a social environment that is permissive of smoking decreases perceived stigmatization.

Enhancing implementation of smoke-free places: A comparative qualitative study across seven European cities.

BACKGROUND: Advocacy, resources and intersubjective reasonable arguments are known as factors that contribute to smoke-free (SF) adoption and implementation in Chinese and Anglo-Saxon places. Less is known about how the implementation of smoking bans differs across European places. The aim of this qualitative comparative study is to identify and classify the SF policy implementation processes and types undertaken at the local level in seven European cities according to the views of local bureaucrats and sub-national stakeholders. METHOD: Semi-structured expert interviews (n = 56) with local decision makers and stakeholders were conducted as qualitative part of the comparative SILNE-R project in Belgium (Namur), Finland (Tampere), Germany (Hanover), the Republic of Ireland (Dublin), the Netherlands (Amersfoort), Italy (Latina), and Portugal (Coimbra). Qualitative interviews were analyzed using the framework analysis. RESULTS: Implementation of SF environments predominantly focuses on indoor bans or youth-related settings. Progressive-hungry (Dublin), moderate-rational (Tampere), upper-saturated (Hanover, Amersfoort), and lower saturated (Namur, Coimbra, Latina) implementation types can be distinguished. These four types differ with regards to their engagement in enhancing SF places as well as along their level of perceived tobacco de-normalization and public smoking visibility. In all municipalities SF environments are adopted at national levels, but are differently implemented at the local level due national policy environments, enforcement strategies and the level of collaboration. Major mechanisms to expand SF regulations were found to be scientific evidence, public support, and the child protection frame. However, counter-mechanisms of closure occur if data on declining prevalence and new youth addiction trends trigger low prioritization. CONCLUSIONS: This study found four SF implementation types two mechanisms of progressive expansion and defensive closure. Development and enhancement of smoking bans requires a suitable national policy environment and indirect national-level support of self-governed local initiatives. Future SF policies can be enhanced by laws pertaining to places frequented by minors.

'[ ] the situation in the schools still remains the Achilles heel.' Barriers to the implementation of school tobacco policies-a qualitative study from local stakeholder's perspective in seven European cities.

School tobacco policies (STPs) are a crucial strategy to reduce adolescents smoking. Existing studies have investigated STPs predominantly from a school-related 'insider' view. Yet, little is known about barriers that are not identified from the 'schools' perspective', such as perceptions of local stakeholders. Forty-six expert interviews from seven European cities with stakeholders at the local level (e.g. representatives of regional health departments, youth protection and the field of addiction prevention) were included. The analysis of the expert interviews revealed different barriers that should be considered during the implementation of STPs. These barriers can be subsumed under the following: (i) Barriers regarding STP legislature (e.g. inconsistencies, partial bans), (ii) collaboration and cooperation problems between institutions and schools, (iii) low priority of smoking prevention and school smoking bans, (iv) insufficient human resources and (v) resistance among smoking students and students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Our findings on the expert's perspective indicate a need to enhance and implement comprehensive school smoking bans. Furthermore, collaboration and cooperation between schools and external institutions should be fostered and strengthened, and adequate human resources should be provided.

Economic Evaluation of Five Tobacco Control Policies Across Seven European Countries.

INTRODUCTION: Economic evaluations of tobacco control policies targeting adolescents are scarce. Few take into account real-world, large-scale implementation costs; few compare cost-effectiveness of different policies across different countries. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of five tobacco control policies (nonschool bans, including bans on sales to minors, bans on smoking in public places, bans on advertising at points-of-sale, school smoke-free bans, and school education programs), implemented in 2016 in Finland, Ireland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Italy, and Portugal. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness estimates were calculated per country and per policy, from the State perspective. Costs were collected by combining quantitative questionnaires with semi-structured interviews on how policies were implemented in each setting, in real practice. Short-term effectiveness was based on the literature, and long-term effectiveness was modeled using the DYNAMO-HIA tool. Discount rates of 3.5% were used for costs and effectiveness. Sensitivity analyses considered 1%-50% short-term effectiveness estimates, highest cost estimates, and undiscounted effectiveness. FINDINGS: Nonschool bans cost up to €253.23 per healthy life year, school smoking bans up to €91.87 per healthy life year, and school education programs up to €481.35 per healthy life year. Cost-effectiveness depended on the costs of implementation, short-term effectiveness, initial smoking rates, dimension of the target population, and weight of smoking in overall mortality and morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: All five policies were highly cost-effective in all countries according to the World Health Organization thresholds for public health interventions. Cost-effectiveness was preserved even when using the highest costs and most conservative effectiveness estimates. IMPLICATIONS: Economic evaluations using real-world data on tobacco control policies implemented at a large scale are scarce, especially considering nonschool bans targeting adolescents. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of five tobacco control policies implemented in 2016 in Finland, Ireland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Italy, and Portugal. This study shows that all five policies were highly cost-effective considering the World Health Organization threshold, even when considering the highest costs and most conservative effectiveness estimates.

The Association Between Smoke-Free School Policies and Adolescents' Perceived Antismoking Norms: Moderation by School Connectedness.

INTRODUCTION: Many European schools implement smoke-free school policies (SFSPs). SFSPs may decrease adolescent smoking by causing adolescents to perceive stronger antismoking norms, yet there exists no quantitative evidence that indicates for which norms and for whom such effects may occur. This study therefore assessed to what extent adolescents' perceived antismoking norms among best friends, teachers, and society at large were associated with SFSPs, and whether these associations were moderated by adolescents' level of school connectedness. AIMS AND METHODS: Survey data were collected in 2016/2017 on 10,653 adolescents aged 14-16 years old and 315 staff members in 55 schools from seven European cities. Associations of adolescent-perceived SFSPs and staff-reported SFSPs with best friend, teacher, and societal antismoking norms were estimated in multilevel logistic regression models, adjusted for demographics and school-level smoking prevalence. We tested for interaction between school connectedness and SFSPs. RESULTS: Adolescent-perceived SFSPs were positively associated with antismoking norms by teachers (odds ratio [OR]: 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15-1.85), were negatively associated with antismoking norms by best friends (OR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.67-0.99), but were not significantly associated with antismoking norms by society at large (OR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.74-1.02). All interaction tests between adolescent-perceived SFSPs and school connectedness were nonsignificant. Staff-reported SFSPs were not associated with any norm and showed no significant interaction with school connectedness. CONCLUSIONS: We found that SFSPs are associated with adolescents' perception of more antismoking norms by teachers, but less antismoking norms by best friends, irrespective of adolescents' level of school connectedness. IMPLICATIONS: Smoke-free school policies, just as many other tobacco control policies, are assumed to foster adolescents' perception of antismoking norms. Still, current evidence does not demonstrate which antismoking norms may be influenced by SFSPs and whether this influence is equal for adolescents with different levels of school connectedness. This study suggests that SFSPs foster adolescents' perception of antismoking norms by teachers, but may concurrently lead to the perception of less antismoking norms by best friends, irrespective of adolescents' school connectedness. SFSPs may therefore need to be complemented with interventions that target antismoking norms in adolescent peer groups.

Transnational tobacco companies and the mechanism of externalization: A realist synthesis.

Externalization theory assumes that risks and costs are systematically displaced from high-income countries (HICs) to low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We review how and why transnational tobacco companies (TTCs) influence the local circumstances of LMICs that trigger externalization mechanisms, leading to tobacco-attributable risk outcomes. Our realist synthesis of scientific evidence and gray literature identifies externalization mechanisms with risk outcomes at the level of health policy, smoking trends, and tobacco production. The results reveal the mediating role of local and global third parties and intermediaries. Externalization mechanisms produce systematic tobacco-attributable inequalities between places located in HICs and those located in LMICs.

The visibility of smoking in Europe and its relationship with youth's positive beliefs about smoking.

OBJECTIVES: To determine adolescent-reported visibility of smoking in different public and private spaces in Europe and associations between smoking visibility and beliefs about the benefits of smoking. METHODS: We used SILNE-R cross-sectional survey data (2016/2017) of 10,798 14-16-year-old students from 55 secondary schools in seven European cities. Respondents reported for private and public spaces whether they had seen others smoke there in the last 6 months. Beliefs about the benefits of smoking were measured on a 7-item scale; higher scores indicated more positive beliefs. Multilevel linear regression analyses determined associations while controlling for potential confounders and stratifying by smoking status. RESULTS: Most students reported observing others smoke in public spaces, especially at train/bus stations (84%). Positive beliefs about smoking of never smokers were positively associated with seeing others smoke in train/bus stations and leisure/sports facilities, but not at home, a friend's home, restaurants or bars, when fully adjusted. Associations were of similar magnitude for ever smokers. CONCLUSIONS: Smoking in several public places is highly visible to adolescents. Reducing this visibility might weaken positive beliefs that adolescents have about smoking.

The association between smoke-free school policies and adolescents' anti-smoking beliefs: Moderation by family smoking norms.

BACKGROUND: Smoke-free school policies (SFSPs) may influence adolescents' smoking through the development of anti-smoking beliefs. We assessed which types of anti-smoking beliefs (health, social and societal) are associated with SFSPs and whether these associations were different for adolescents in smoking permissive versus prohibitive families. METHODS: Survey data was collected in 2016-2017 from 10,980 adolescents between 14-16 years old and 315 staff in 55 schools from seven European cities. We separately measured adolescent-perceived SFSP and staff-reported SFSP at the school-level. Associations between SFSP and anti-smoking health, social and societal beliefs were studied using multi-level logistic regression, adjusting for demographics and school-level smoking prevalence. We tested for interactions between family norms and SFSP, and estimated associations for adolescents in permissive and prohibitive families, respectively. RESULTS: Adolescent-perceived SFSP was not significantly associated with anti-smoking health (OR:1.08, 95%CI:0.94-1.25), social (OR:0.89, 95%CI:0.75-1.04) and societal beliefs (OR:1.15, 95%CI:0.99-1.33). Staff-reported SFSP were associated with anti-smoking health beliefs (OR:1.12, 95%CI:1.01-1.24), but not with social (OR:0.94, 95%CI:0.83-1.07) or societal beliefs (OR:1.02, 95%CI:0.90-1.14). Most results were comparable between adolescents in smoking prohibitive and permissive families. However, in smoking prohibitive families, adolescent-perceived SFSP were associated with societal beliefs (OR:1.24, 95%CI:1.06-1.46), but not in permissive families (OR:1.06, 95%CI:0.90-1.25). Also, in smoking permissive families, staff-reported SFSP were associated with more pro-smoking social beliefs (OR:0.83, 95%CI:0.72-0.96), but not in prohibitive families (OR:1.05, 95%CI:0.92-1.16). CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence that SFSP are associated with some anti-smoking beliefs, but more so among adolescents from smoking prohibitive families than from permissive families.

Exposure to car smoking among youth in seven cities across the European Union.

BACKGROUND: In the United States and Canada, cars were found to be a major source of harmful secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure among youth. Little is known about the magnitude of this public health problem in European countries. We study SHS exposure in vehicles among adolescents across seven cities of the European Union (EU), with a particular focus on socioeconomic characteristics and smoking in adolescents' social environment. METHODS: Self-reported survey data on SHS exposure in cars during the past seven days was obtained from the 2016/17 cross-sectional SILNE-R study for 14- to 17 year old adolescents in seven EU cities (N = 10,481). We applied two multivariable logistic regression models with sociodemographic characteristics and mediating smoking-related factors. RESULTS: SHS exposure in cars varied widely across the seven EU cities: 6% in Tampere (Finland), 12% in Dublin (Ireland), 15% in Amersfoort (the Netherlands), 19% in Hanover (Germany), 23% in Coimbra (Portugal), 36% in Namur (Belgium) and 43% in Latina (Italy). Low paternal (OR 1.65, CI95% 1.38-1.98) and maternal (OR 1.40, CI95% 1.16-1.68) educational levels and parental migration (OR 1.37, CI95% 1.14-1.64) backgrounds were correlated with SHS exposure in cars. Other correlates were one's own or peer smoking and environmental family factors, such as having at least one parental smoker (OR 4.04, CI95% 3.49-4.68) and partial smoking bans at home. CONCLUSIONS: In most of these seven cities, a considerable proportion of youth riding in cars, particularly those from disadvantaged and smoking-permissive backgrounds, is exposed to SHS in cars.

Explaining Mechanisms That Influence Smoke-Free Implementation at the Local Level: A Realist Review of Smoking Bans.

INTRODUCTION: While studies have been undertaken to understand the adoption of outdoor and indoor smoking bans, not much is known about why implementation of smoke-free (SF) environments differs at local levels. As most European countries remain at the level of indoor bans, we aim to translate existing evidence into practical recommendations on how to improve SF (outdoor) implementation within European municipalities. METHODS: We applied six methodological steps of a realist review consistent with the RAMESES publication standards for realist syntheses. Literature search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science. In total, 3829 references were screened, of which 43 were synthesized. Studies dating from 2004 to 2015 with rigor evidence of SF implementation at the local level were selected. Implementation outcomes were SF enforcement, monitoring, nonsmoking compliance, and public support in cities. RESULTS: The explanatory realist framework links four innovation stages with three context-mechanism-outcome (CMO)configurations. We identified "triggering trust," "increasing priorities," and "limiting opposing interests" as underlying mechanisms, when (1) establishing, (2) developing, (3) contesting, and (4) implementing local smoking bans. The CMO propositions (CMOs) support practical recommendations, such as (1) providing authorities with local data when establishing and developing bans, (2) developing long-term strategies and implementing state-funded SF programs to prioritize sustained enforcement, and (3) limiting opposing interests through the use of the child protection frame. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first realist review on the implementation of SF enviroments at the local level. The process-oriented theory explains how and why CMOs determine SF development in cities and municipalities from planning until implementation. IMPLICATIONS: In 2015, only 16% of the world's population lived under the jurisdiction of comprehensive SF laws. The findings of this realist review are useful to implement WHO goals of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) and specifically SF environments at more local levels and to adjust them to specific contextual circumstances. This paper unpacks three mechanisms that could be triggered by SF strategies developed at local levels and that can result in improved policy implementation. Such evidence is needed to enhance SF strategies at the level of cities and municipalities and to achieve WHO "Healthy Cities Network" objectives.