Asentamientos precarios en la Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires: Apuntes para una revisión de los conceptos de villa, asentamiento y núcleo habitacional transitorio en el marco de la producción estadística / Precarious settlements in Buenos Aires City: Notes for a review of the concepts of villa, settlement and transient housing nucleus in the framework of statistical production

El presente informe documenta las tareas realizadas por la Dirección General de Estadística y Censos del Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires (DGEyC-GCBA), en el marco del Programa de Estudios de Pobreza del Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos (INDEC), para contribuir a la definición conceptual y operativa de los asentamientos irregulares o precarios (y su tipología) en la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Las definiciones son el paso necesario que permite identificar estas áreas de la Cuidad, por lo tanto, resultan esenciales tanto para las tareas pre-censales (en perspectiva del próximo Censo de Población, Hogares y Viviendas de 2020) como para la explotación de los datos. En la primera parte se presenta una reseña histórica, en la que se describe el proceso de conformación y evolución de los asentamientos precarios (villas, asentamientos y Núcleos Habitacionales Transitorios) en la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, haciendo eje en los aspectos demográficos y sociopolíticos que lo marcaron, y se presenta una imagen de la situación actual de dichas áreas, detallando los cambios en marcha. En un segundo apartado, se analizan las definiciones vigentes, tanto conceptuales como operativas, utilizadas tanto por la DGEyC, como por organismos públicos del GCBA, y por organismos nacionales, provinciales y la academia. A la vez, se presentan los criterios operativos empleados por la DGEyC en las tareas pre-censales y en el procesamiento de la información del Censo 2010 en las áreas con asentamientos precarios. Finalmente, a partir de la información disponible (con datos del Censo 2010), se analizan los indicadores sociodemográficos que intervienen en las definiciones relevadas con el propósito de encontrar regularidades en cada uno de los tipos de asentamientos precarios analizados. (AU)

Evaluation of percentage-based radon testing requirements for federally funded multi-family housing projects.

Radon is a leading cause of lung cancer. Recommendations for radon testing in multi-family housing focus on testing a percentage of all units. There is considerable variability among recommendations as well as their implementation. I used the hypergeometric distribution to determine the probability of identifying one or more units with radon at or above 4.0 pCi/L for two prevalences (1:15, the U.S. average) and 1:3 (for states with many homes with radon ≥4.0 pCi/L) using two approaches. First, the distribution was used to evaluate the probability of finding one or more units with radon at or above 4.0 pCi/L when: (1) testing 10% or 25% of a range of ground-floor units; or (2) testing a varying percentage of units in 10-, 20-, or 30- ground-floor unit buildings. Second, the method was used to determine the number of units to be tested to identify one or more units with radon at or above 4.0 pCi/L with 95% probability, given a range of total ground-floor units. Analyses identified that testing 10% or 25% of ground-floor units had low probability of identifying at least one unit with radon at or above 4.0 pCi/L, especially at low prevalence. At low prevalence (1:15), at least 10 units need to be tested in structures with 20 or fewer total units; at high prevalence (1:3), at least 5 units need to be tested in units with structures having 10 or fewer units to achieve 95% probability of identifying at least one unit with radon at or above 4.0 pCi/L. These findings indicate that recommendations for radon testing in multi-family housing may be improved by applying a well-established and more rigorous statistical approach than percentage-based testing to more accurately characterize exposure to radon in multi-family housing units, which could improve lung cancer prevention efforts.

Healthcare Costs of Secondhand Smoke Exposure at Home for U.S. Children.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study is to estimate healthcare utilization and healthcare costs due to secondhand smoke exposure at home for children in the U.S. METHODS: Using data from the 2000, 2005, and 2010 U.S. National Health Interview Surveys, the authors analyzed the association between secondhand smoke exposure at home and utilization of three types of healthcare services (hospital nights, emergency room visits, and doctor visits) for children aged 3-14 years (N=16,860). A zero-inflated Poisson regression model was used to control for sociodemographic characteristics and the number of months without health insurance. The authors determined excess healthcare utilization attributable to secondhand smoke exposure at home for children and then estimated annual secondhand smoke-attributable healthcare costs as the product of annual excess healthcare utilization and unit costs obtained from the 2014 Medical Expenditures Panel Survey. This study was conducted from 2016 to 2018. RESULTS: The prevalence of secondhand smoke exposure at home for children in 2000, 2005, and 2010 was 25.0%, 12.3%, and 9.1%, respectively. Secondhand smoke exposure at home was positively associated with emergency room visits, but was not significantly associated with nights at the hospital or doctor visits for children. Secondhand smoke exposure at home for children resulted in an excess of 347,156 emergency room visits in 2000, 124,412 visits in 2005, and 101,570 visits in 2010, which amounted to $215.1 million, $77.1 million, and $62.9 million in excess annual healthcare costs (2014 dollars) in 2000, 2005, and 2010, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although U.S. healthcare costs attributable to secondhand smoke exposure at home for children are declining, interventions to reduce secondhand smoke exposure at home for children are still needed to reduce the economic burden attributable to secondhand smoke exposure.

Unequal Protection: Secondhand Smoke Threatens Health of Tenants in Multi-Unit Housing in Los Angeles.

Secondhand smoke is dangerous to a person's health at any level of exposure. Yet policies that prevent smoking are not in place for a majority of market-rate multi-unit housing complexes, according to a new survey of nearly 1,000 apartment dwellers in the city of Los Angeles. Approximately 37 percent of respondents reported that secondhand smoke had drifted into their apartments in the past year. Households with members of vulnerable populations, such as children or individuals with chronic conditions, are more likely to report smoke drifting from adjacent units. Four out of five respondents--including more than half of those who self-reported currently smoking--supported a smoke-free policy in common areas and/or individual units.

Reactions to smoke-free public policies and smoke-free home policies in the Republic of Georgia: results from a 2014 national survey.

OBJECTIVES: We examined receptivity to public smoke-free policies and smoke-free home status among adults in the Republic of Georgia. METHODS: In Spring 2014, we conducted a national household survey of 1163 adults. RESULTS: Our sample was on average 42.4 years old, 51.1 % male, and 43.2 % urban. Current smoking prevalence was 54.2 % in men and 6.5 % in women. Notably, 42.2 % reported daily secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe). Past week SHSe was 29.9 % in indoor public places and 33.0 % in outdoor public places. The majority reported no opposition to public smoke-free policies. Correlates of greater receptivity to public policies included being older, female, and a nonsmoker. Past week SHSe in homes was 54.2 %; 38.8 % reported daily SHSe at home. Only 14.3 % reported complete smoke-free home policies; 39.0 % had partial policies. The only correlate of allowing smoking in the home was being a smoker. Among smokers, correlates of allowing smoking in the home were being male and lower confidence in quitting. CONCLUSIONS: SHSe is prevalent in various settings in Georgia, requiring efforts to promote support for public smoke-free policies and implementation of personal policies.

Factors Associated with Complete Home Smoking Ban among Chinese Parents of Young Children.

(1) BACKGROUND: The home environment is a major source of Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) exposure among children especially in early childhood. ETS exposure is an important health risk among children and can cause severe and chronic diseases, such as asthma, bronchitis, and premature death. However, ETS exposure at home has often been neglected in the Chinese families. Identification of factors that facilitate or otherwise hamper the adoption of home smoking ban will help in the design and implementation of evidence-based intervention programs. This study identifies factors correlated with home smoking bans in Chinese families with children. (2) METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of parents living in Nanning city, Guangxi Province, China with at least one smoker and a child in the household was conducted between September, 2013 and January, 2014. A Chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables differences between the parents who had home smoking bans and those with no home smoking ban. Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to identify factors correlated with home smoking bans. (3) RESULTS: 969 completed questionnaires were collected with a response rate of 92.29% (969/1050). Of the respondents (n = 969), 14.34% had complete home smoking bans. Factors that were associated with home smoking bans were: having no other smokers in the family (OR = 2.173), attaining education up to high school (OR = 2.471), believing that paternal smoking would increase the risk of lower respiratory tract illnesses (OR = 2.755), perceiving the fact that smoking cigarettes in the presence of the child will hurt the child's health (OR = 1.547), believing that adopting a no smoking policy at home is very important (OR = 2.816), and being confident to prevent others to smoke at home (OR = 1.950). Additionally, parents who perceived difficulty in adopting a no smoking policy at home would not have a home smoking ban (OR = 0.523). (4) CONCLUSIONS: A home smoking ban is not widely adopted by families of hospitalized children in Guangxi Province, China. To protect the health of children, there is a need to develop and test interventions to promote home smoking bans. Factors identified as predictors of home smoking ban should be considered in the design of interventions.

Assessment of Residents' Attitudes and Satisfaction Before and After Implementation of a Smoke-Free Policy in Boston Multiunit Housing.

INTRODUCTION: In 2012, the Boston Housing Authority (BHA) in Massachusetts implemented a smoke-free policy prohibiting smoking within its residences. We sought to characterize BHA resident experiences before and after the smoke-free policy implementation, and compare them to that of nearby residents of the Cambridge Housing Authority, which had no such policy. METHODS: We recruited a convenience sample of nonsmoking residents from the BHA and Cambridge Housing Authority. We measured residents' awareness and support of their local smoking policies before and 9-12 months after the BHA's policy implementation, as well as BHA respondents' attitudes towards the smoke-free policy. We assessed tobacco smoke exposure via saliva cotinine, airborne apartment nicotine, and self-reported number of days smelling smoke in the home. We evaluated predictors of general satisfaction at follow-up using linear regression. RESULTS: At follow-up, 91% of BHA respondents knew that smoking was not allowed in apartments and 82% were supportive of such a policy in their building. BHA residents believed enforcement of the smoke-free policy was low. Fifty-one percent of BHA respondents indicated that other residents "never" or "rarely" followed the new smoke-free rule and 41% of respondents were dissatisfied with policy enforcement. Dissatisfaction with enforcement was the strongest predictor of general housing satisfaction, while objective and self-reported measures of tobacco smoke exposure were not predictive of satisfaction. At follow-up, 24% of BHA participants had complained to someone in charge about policy violations. CONCLUSIONS: Resident support for smoke-free policies is high. However, lack of enforcement of smoke-free policies may cause frustration and resentment among residents, potentially leading to a decrease in housing satisfaction. IMPLICATIONS: Smoke-free housing laws are becoming increasingly prevalent, yet little is known about satisfaction and compliance with such policies post-implementation. We evaluated nonsmoking residents' attitudes about smoke-free rules and their satisfaction with enforcement 1 year after the BHA implemented its comprehensive smoke-free policy. We found that while residents were supportive of the policy, they believed enforcement was low, a perception that was associated with a drop in housing satisfaction. Our findings point to a desire for smoke-free housing among public housing residents, and the importance of establishing systems and guidelines to help landlords monitor and enforce these policies effectively.

Smoke-Free Policies in Multiunit Housing: Smoking Behavior and Reactions to Messaging Strategies in Support or in Opposition.

INTRODUCTION: Given the high proportion of US adults living in multiunit housing (MUH) and the related risks of secondhand smoke, we examined correlates of having smoke-free MUH policies, level of support for such policies, and reactions to related messaging among a quota-based nonprobability sample of US adults. METHODS: In 2013, 752 adult MUH residents were recruited through an online survey panel to complete a cross-sectional survey assessing tobacco use, personal smoke-free policies in homes and cars, smoke-free MUH policies, and reactions to messaging on smoke-free MUH policies. We sought sufficient representation of smokers, racial/ethnic minorities, and residents of the Southeast. RESULTS: Overall, 56.3% had no smoke-free MUH policies and 16.2% had complete policies; 62.8% favored living in smoke-free MUH, and 28.9% said they would move if their building became smoke-free. Multivariate regression indicated that correlates of living in MUH with partial or no policies included younger age, less education, lower income, and current smoking (P's ≤ .01); more restrictive smoke-free MUH policies were associated with lower cigarette consumption and recent quit attempts among current smokers (P's < .05); and correlates of support for MUH policies included greater education, nonsmoker status, and having complete MUH policies (P's < .05). Of 9 messages opposing smoke-free MUH policies, the most persuasive was "People have the right to smoke in their own homes"; the most persuasive message of 11 in support was "You have the right to breathe clean air in your home." CONCLUSION: Smoke-free MUH policies may reduce smoking. Messaging in favor of smoke-free MUH policies was more persuasive than messaging opposing such policies, indicating the potential for using these approaches.

Tobacco use policy in military housing.

Secondhand smoke and thirdhand smoke (e.g., smoke residues found on walls and floors) are known to pose health hazards. Some landlords and cities have therefore established smoke-free policies for multiunit housing. The military is in effect the largest landlord in the United States, with approximately 630,000 units of housing. We reviewed the service-level tobacco control policies of the Army, the Air Force, and the Navy and Marine Corps (which share a policy) for references to housing, to see if personnel are adequately protected from secondhand and thirdhand smoke. Policies covering most family housing and all housing for single enlisted personnel fail to fully protect residents from secondhand or thirdhand smoke. The current review of tobacco control policy in the military should recommend a consistent policy of tobacco-free living quarters.

Predictors of smoke-free policies in affordable multiunit housing, North Carolina, 2013.

INTRODUCTION: Smoke-free policies can effectively protect nonsmokers from secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure in multiunit housing. We surveyed all affordable multiunit housing properties in North Carolina to determine the statewide prevalence of smoke-free policies and to identify predictors of smoke-free policies. METHODS: Representatives of affordable housing properties in North Carolina completed a mailed or online survey during June through October 2013. The primary outcome measure was presence of a smoke-free policy, defined as prohibiting smoking in all residential units. We used χ(2) analysis and multivariate logistic regression to identify correlates of smoke-free policies. RESULTS: Of 1,865 eligible properties, responses were received for 1,063 (57%). A total of 16.5% of properties had policies that prohibited smoking in all residential units, while 69.6% prohibited smoking in indoor common areas. In multivariate analysis, an increase in the number of children per unit was associated with a decrease in the odds of having a smoke-free policy at most properties. Newer properties across all company sizes were more likely to have smoke-free policies. Accessing units from interior hallways predicted smoke-free policies among medium-sized companies. CONCLUSION: More smoke-free policies in affordable multiunit housing are needed to protect vulnerable populations, particularly children, from SHS exposure. Public health professionals should continue to educate housing operators about SHS and the benefits of smoke-free policies at all properties, including older ones and ones where units are accessed from outside rather than from an interior hallway.

Evaluating the implementation process of a citywide smoke-free multiunit housing ordinance: insights from community stakeholders.

We evaluated the implementation process of Richmond, California's citywide smoke-free multiunit housing ordinance. We conducted semistructured focus groups with multiunit housing tenants, owners, and managers. Residents understood the harms of secondhand smoke but lacked accurate information about the ordinance and questioned its enforceability. They shared concerns that the city lacked cessation resources for smokers wishing to quit because of the ordinance. To increase compliance with the ordinance, tenants, owners, and managers need accurate information.

A statewide assessment of smoke-free policy in multiunit housing settings.

INTRODUCTION: The prevalence of smoke-free policies in multiunit housing (MUH) in South Dakota was examined. Owner beliefs about smoke-free policies were identified. METHODS: Stratified random sampling included 27 South Dakota counties classified as frontier, large rural, or urban. Data collection with MUH owners in selected counties employed a telephone survey with mailed backup. RESULTS: The owner response rate was 41.5% (324/780). A written smoke-free policy was reported by 175 (54.0%) owners, and 31 (10%) reported a verbal smoke-free policy. Owners in large rural counties (57.4%) had more written smoke-free policies than owners in urban (52.2%) and frontier (53.5%) counties. Only 8.5% of properties had policies covering both buildings and grounds. Owners without policies were more than twice as likely to manage U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development subsidized units and were three times as likely to be current smokers. Owners without a smoke-free policy anticipated that a policy would decrease maintenance costs but increase turnover and vacancy rates. Nearly one-half (47.9%) of owners with no smoke-free policy had previously considered implementing a policy. Owners self-reported beliefs about smoke-free policies identified perceived benefits such as decreased maintenance and costs, improved tenant safety and health, and conscientious tenants. Perceived drawbacks included increased outdoor maintenance, enforcement problems, concerns about long-term tenants who smoke, and freedom/rights of smokers. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a baseline assessment of smoke-free polices in MUH settings. Perceptions of owners without smoke-free policies focused on economic concerns that were inconsistent with reports from those owners with smoke-free policies.

Primary prevention of lead poisoning: protecting children from unsafe housing.

OBJECTIVES: We examined the effects of changes in Rhode Island's Lead Hazard Mitigation Law in 2005 on children's blood lead levels. METHODS: We used 2005 to 2009 data from Rhode Island's Lead Elimination Surveillance System; city tax assessor records in Central Falls, Pawtucket, Providence, and Woonsocket, Rhode Island; and records of conformance to the state's lead hazard mitigation law, to assess the extent to which legislation changes resulted in minimizing children's exposure to lead. RESULTS: During the 5-year study, the proportion of properties that complied with the new law increased for properties that housed young children. However, the majority of rental properties did not comply with the law. Children's lead levels declined by approximately 1 microgram per deciliter on average in properties that did comply, demonstrating that the law could have a protective effect for children. CONCLUSIONS: Legislation changes increased the proportion of properties that were certified as nonhazardous, leading to decreased blood lead levels for children living in these properties. However, legislation cannot be a highly effective primary prevention strategy if it does not cover all properties where children live and is not strictly enforced.

Sharing the air, the legal and ethical considerations of extending tobacco legislation to include multiunit dwellings in Alberta.

This study explores the legal and ethical considerations of extending tobacco legislation to include multiunit dwellings (MUDs) in Alberta and the implications for public health nursing practice. The tobacco legislation in Canada currently protects individuals in public places and not private dwellings. In Alberta, there are over 1 million individuals living in MUDs who are exposed to environmental tobacco smoke. Children are particularly vulnerable to the negative health effects. As well, many apartment fires in Alberta are related to smoking which makes expanding tobacco legislation to include MUDs an important public health issue. There are many potential barriers to the adoption of this tobacco legislation including legal, ethical, and civil rights concerns, and the bureaucracy of the political process. This study articulates the position that it is both legal and ethical to expand provincial tobacco legislation to include MUDs after the consideration of individual civil rights and using the Canadian Nurses Association Code of Ethics for Registered Nurses (2008) as a guide for practice. Public health nurses must advocate for a change in the current legislation by becoming politically active and building community capacity to demonstrate accountability and promote social justice.

Home smoking policies in urban households with children and smokers.

OBJECTIVE: We identified household, child, and demographic characteristics associated with not having a smoking ban and having a rule about smoking in the presence of children in an urban population. METHOD: We conducted a cross-sectional random digit dial telephone survey (n=456) of Philadelphia parents in June 2012. RESULTS: Forty-eight percent of homes reported a full smoking ban. In homes that allowed smoking, over half allowed smoking in front of children. Cigarettes smoked in the home decreased as the restrictiveness of the bans increased. Multinomial logistic regression analyses showed that compared to having a full ban, banning smoking only in the presence of children was associated with being African-American, having a child >5 years old, and having an asthma-free child. These characteristics, as well as having both parents as smokers and not having an outdoor space, were also associated with not having any restrictions. CONCLUSION: It is possible that households attempt to reduce home smoking by limiting smoking in the presence of children. Health communication messages should be used to inform families about the lingering effects of SHS in the home even when smoking does not occur in the presence of a child.

The impact of recent changes in smoke alarm legislation on residential fire injuries and smoke alarm ownership in New South Wales, Australia.

In 2006, New South Wales (NSW) state legislation changed from requiring smoke alarms in new houses only to all houses. We evaluated the impact of this legislative change on residential fire injury and smoke alarm ownership characteristics. Residential fire injuries for 2002 to 2010 were identified from hospitalization data for all hospitals in NSW. Data relating to smoke alarm ownership and demographic factors were obtained from the NSW Population Health Survey. Negative binomial regression analysis was used to analyze trends over time. Prior to the introduction of universal legislation, hospitalization rates were increasing slightly; however, following the introduction of legislation, hospitalization rates decreased by an estimated 36.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.7-55.8) annually. Smoke alarm ownership increased from 73.3% (95% CI, 72.5-74.2) prelegislation to 93.6% (95% CI, 93.1-94.2) 18 months postlegislation. Thirty percent of households reported testing their alarms regularly. Speaking a language other than English (relative risks [RRs], 1.82; 95% CI, 1.44-2.99), allowing smoking in the home (RR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.31-2.27), and being part of the most disadvantaged socioeconomic group (RR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.14-1.91) remain major risk factors for nonownership. Broadening the scope of state legislation has had a positive impact on residential fire-related hospitalizations and smoke alarm ownership. However, it is of concern that the legislation has been the least effective in increasing smoke alarm ownership among non-English-speaking households, in households where smoking is allowed, in low socioeconomic households, and that a high proportion of householders do not test their smoke alarms regularly. Targeted campaigns are needed to reach these high-risk groups and to ensure that smoke alarms are functional.

'Neighbour smoke'--exposure to secondhand smoke in multiunit dwellings in Denmark in 2010: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: 'Neighbour smoke' is transfer of secondhand smoke between apartments including shared areas, such as hallways, community rooms and stairwells in multiunit dwellings and is an emerging issue for public health and health equity. OBJECTIVE: To describe the prevalence of exposure to neighbour smoke in Denmark. METHODS: A population-based sample of 5049 respondents (2183 in multiunit dwellings) living in Denmark aged ≥15 years completed a questionnaire in 2010 on tobacco-related behaviour and exposure to secondhand smoke. The authors examined the relations between exposure to neighbour smoke, own smoking, smoking inside the home, type of residence and demographic factors with descriptive statistics and logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: In this sample, 22% of those living in multiunit dwellings reported exposure to neighbour smoke. Of respondents living in apartments, 41% preferred to live in a building in which smoking is banned. Smoke-free buildings were preferred by 58% of persons exposed to neighbour smoke compared with 37% of persons not exposed. Of the smokers (daily and occasional), 14% preferred to live in a smoke-free building; 31% never smoked indoors in their own home. CONCLUSIONS: The only way to avoid absorbing tobacco smoke from neighbours is to live in a smoke-free multiunit dwelling. There is great demand for such dwellings, especially by young people, people with children and people exposed to neighbour smoke, as well as by people who smoke.