Tobacco smoke incursion into private residences in Israel: a cross-sectional study examining public perceptions of private rights and support for governmental policies.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco smoke incursion (TSI) into private residences is a widespread problem in many countries. We sought to assess the prevalence of self-reported TSI and public attitudes about TSI in Israel, a country with a relatively high smoking prevalence and high population density. METHODS: We conducted a random digit dial survey among residents in Israel (N = 285) in 2017, which examined the frequency, source, correlates of, and attitudes towards TSI and potential regulatory options. The cooperation rate was 63.9%. RESULTS: Among respondents, 44.7% reported ever experiencing home TSI, with higher exposure among residents of multi-unit housing (MUH) (MUH versus private homes: aOR (Adjusted Odds Ratio): 3.60, CI (Confidence Interval): [1.96, 6.58], p < .001). Most respondents (69.8%), including nearly half of smokers, prioritized the right of individuals to breath smoke-free air in their apartments over the right of smokers to smoke in their apartments. Women and non-smokers were more likely to support the right to breathe smoke-free air (Women versus men: aOR: 2.77 CI: [1.48, 5.16], p = .001; Nonsmokers versus smokers: aOR: 3.21 CI [1.59, 6.48], p = .001). However, only about a quarter (24.8%) of respondents who ever experienced TSI raised the issue with the neighbor who smoked, the neighbor's landlord, or the building committee. The vast majority (85.2%) of all respondents, including three-quarters of smokers, supported smoke-free legislation for multi-unit housing (MUH), with those ever-exposed to TSI and non-smokers more likely to support legislation (ever-exposed versus never-exposed aOR = 2.99, CI [1.28, 6.97], p = 0.011; nonsmokers versus smokers aOR = 3.00, CI [1.28, 7.01], p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Among study participants, tobacco smoke incursion was a common, yet unwelcome experience. Most respondents believed that the right to breathe smoke-free air in one's apartment superseded that of neighbors to smoke anywhere in their home, and most supported legislation to prevent TSI. Though further study is needed to understand better TSI and effective methods for its prevention, our findings suggest that policy interventions, including legal action at the level of the Supreme Court and/or the Knesset, are needed. Regulation, policy initiatives and campaigns to denormalize smoking in proximity to other people and private residences globally could reduce the scope of this widespread problem, protect individuals from home TSI, and improve population health.

The association between risk perceptions, anxiety, and self-reported changes in tobacco and nicotine product use due to COVID-19 in May-June 2020 in Israel.

BACKGROUND: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, reports about a possible protective effect of nicotine on COVID-19 conflicted with messaging by public health organizations about increased risks of COVID-19 due to smoking. The ambiguous information the public received, combined with COVID-19-induced anxiety, may have led to changes in tobacco or other nicotine product use. This study examined changes in use of combustible cigarettes (CCs), nargila (hookah/waterpipe), e-cigarettes, and IQOS and home-smoking behaviors. We also assessed COVID-19 related anxiety and perceptions regarding changes in risk of COVID-19 severity due to smoking. METHODS: We used cross-sectional data from a population telephone survey that was conducted in Israel in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic (May-June 2020) and included 420 adult (age 18+) individuals who reported having ever used CCs (n = 391), nargila (n = 193), and/or electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes)/heated tobacco products (e.g., IQOS) (n = 52). Respondents were asked about the effect that COVID-19 had on their nicotine product use (quit/reduced use, no change, increased use). We assessed changes in product use, risk perceptions, and anxiety using adjusted multinomial logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Most respondents did not change their frequency of product use (CCs: 81.0%, nargila: 88.2%, e-cigarettes/IQOS: 96.8%). A small percentage either decreased use (CCs: 7.2%, nargila: 3.2%, e-cigarettes/IQOS:2.4%) or increased use (CCs:11.8%, nargila:8.6%, e-cigarettes/IQOS:+ 0.9%). 55.6% of respondents used a product in the home prior to COVID-19; but during the first lockdown COVID-19 period, a greater percentage increased (12.6%) than decreased (4.0%) their home use. Higher levels of anxiety due to COVID-19 were associated with increased home smoking (aOR = 1.59, 95% CI:1.04-2.42, p = 0.02). Many respondents believed that increased severity of COVID-19 illness was associated with CCs (62.0%) and e-cigarettes/vaping (45.3%), with uncertainty about the association being lower for CCs (20.5%) than for vaping (41.3%). CONCLUSIONS: While many respondents believed that nicotine product use (particularly CCs and e-cigarettes) was associated with increased risk of COVID-19 disease severity, the majority of users did not change their tobacco/nicotine use. The confusion about the relationship between tobacco use and COVID-19 calls for clear evidence-based messaging from governments. The association between home smoking and increased COVID-19-related stress suggests the need for campaigns and resources to prevent smoking in the home, particularly during times of stress.

Tobacco Smoke Exposure According to Location of Home Smoking in Israel: Findings from the Project Zero Exposure Study.

Young children are particularly vulnerable to harms from tobacco smoke exposure (TSE). This study aimed to compare TSE: (1) between children who live in smoking families and those who do not; and (2) among children who live in smoking households with varying smoking locations. The data came from two studies that were conducted concurrently in Israel (2016-2018). Study 1: a randomized controlled trial of smoking families (n = 159); Study 2: a cohort study of TSE among children in non-smoking families (n = 20). Hair samples were collected from one child in each household. Baseline hair nicotine data were analyzed for 141 children in Study 1 and 17 children in Study 2. Using a logistic regression analysis (exposed vs. not exposed as per laboratory determination) and a linear regression (log hair nicotine), we compared TSE between: (1) children in Study 1 vs. Study 2; (2) children in families with different smoking locations in Study 1: balcony; garden, yard, or other place outside of the home; or inside the home (designated smoking areas within the home (DSAs) or anywhere). A higher proportion of children living in smoking households were measurably exposed to tobacco smoke (68.8%) compared to children living in non-smoking households (35.3%, p = 0.006). Among children from smoking families, 75.0% of those whose parents smoked in the house were exposed, while 61.8% of children whose parents restricted smoking to the porch (n = 55) were exposed, and 71.4% of those whose parents smoked outside the home (including gardens and yards) (n = 42) were exposed. In univariable and multivariable models, smoking location was not significantly associated with exposure. The majority of children in smoking families were measurably exposed to TSE, even if smoking was restricted to designated areas in the home, balconies, orgarden/yard/other outdoor areas. Reducing population smoking rates, particularly among parents, restricting smoking to at least 10 meters from homes and children, and denormalizing smoking around others are recommended to reduce population-level child TSE and tobacco-attributable disease and death.

Association between objective measures and parent-reported measures of child tobacco smoke exposure: A secondary data analysis of four trials.

INTRODUCTION: Tobacco smoke exposure (TSE) harms children and adults. Studies of childhood TSE exposure often relies on parental reports, but may benefit from objective measures. The objective of our study was to study the relationship between reported and objective measures of TSE. METHODS: We analyzed data from four intervention trials, conducted in clinical or community settings, to identify objective measures most closely associated with parent-reported measures and the optimal set of parent-reported measures for predicting objective measures. We also assessed whether there was a learning curve in reported exposure over time, and the importance of replicate biomarker measures. RESULTS: Correlations between objective and parent-reported measures of child TSE were modest at best, ranging from zero to 0.41. Serum cotinine and urinary cotinine were most strongly associated with parental reports. Parental questions most closely related to biomarkers were number of cigarettes and home smoking rules; together these formed the best set of predictive questions. No trial included all objective measures and all questions, precluding definitive statements about relative advantages. Within-subject repeatability of biomarker measures varied across studies, suggesting that direct pilot data are needed to assess the benefit of replicate measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in objective and parent-reported child exposure measurements are needed to accurately monitor child TSE, evaluate efforts to reduce such exposure, and better protect child health.

Efficient study design to estimate population means with multiple measurement instruments.

Outcomes from studies assessing exposure often use multiple measurements. In previous work, using a model first proposed by Buonoccorsi (1991), we showed that combining direct (eg, biomarkers) and indirect (eg, self-report) measurements provides a more accurate picture of true exposure than estimates obtained when using a single type of measurement. In this article, we propose a tool for efficient design of studies that include both direct and indirect measurements of a relevant outcome. Based on data from a pilot or preliminary study, the tool, which is available online as a shiny app at https://michalbitan.shinyapps.io/shinyApp/, can be used to compute: (1) the sample size required for a statistical power analysis, while optimizing the percent of participants who should provide direct measures of exposure (biomarkers) in addition to the indirect (self-report) measures provided by all participants; (2) the ideal number of replicates; and (3) the allocation of resources to intervention and control arms. In addition we show how to examine the sensitivity of results to underlying assumptions. We illustrate our analysis using studies of tobacco smoke exposure and nutrition. In these examples, a near-optimal allocation of the resources can be found even if the assumptions are not precise.

Protecting Children From Tobacco Smoke Exposure: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Project Zero Exposure.

INTRODUCTION: Young children are vulnerable to harm from tobacco smoke exposure (TSE). This study assessed the effect of Project Zero Exposure-an intervention program designed to help parents protect children from TSE-on children's exposure. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial of a home-based, theory-driven intervention. Parents of young children (<8 y) in families with a smoking parent were eligible. The intervention included feedback on child TSE (hair nicotine), and home air quality (PM2.5), with motivational interviewing. Families were randomized to: intervention group (IG, N = 69), regular control group (RCG, N = 70), or to a secondary enhanced control group, (ECG, N = 20). Child hair samples were taken at baseline and follow-up. We report on child TSE in the IG versus RCG at six months. RESULTS: Most enrolled families completed the trial (IG: 98.6%[68/69], RCG: 97.1%[68/70]). Log hair nicotine (LHN [ng/mg]) decreased in both the IG (Baseline: -1.78 ± 1.91, Follow-up: -2.82 ± 1.87, p = .003) and RCG (Baseline: -1.79 ± 1.54, Follow-up: -2.85 ± 1.73, p = .002), but did not differ between groups at study end (p = .635). Three of five parentally-reported outcomes showed improvement over time in the IG, and one in the RCG. Among IG participants, 90% found hair nicotine feedback useful. CONCLUSIONS: No difference between the intervention and control groups was found on the objective biomarker, LHN. Child TSE decreased during the trial in intervention and control groups. Trial participation, which included hair nicotine monitoring, may have contributed to decreasing exposure in both groups. Concurrent control group improvements may partially explain lack of proven intervention benefit. Biomarker monitoring warrants further investigation for reduction of child TSE. IMPLICATIONS: Project Zero Exposure is an intervention program designed to help parents protect their children from TSE. Results from the randomized controlled trial of the program showed no difference between groups at study end, but a clear and substantial reduction in child exposure to tobacco smoke from beginning to end of the trial, in both intervention and control groups. Biomarker monitoring, a key element of the trial, was used with all participants. Biomarker monitoring of child exposure to tobacco smoke may help parents become aware of their child's exposure and better protect them, and should be explored as a means to reduce child TSE. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02867241.