The economic impact of exposure to secondhand smoke in Minnesota

Healthcare costs attributable to secondhand smoke exposure among Indian adults

INTRODUCTION

This paper estimates the direct economic costs of diseases attributable to secondhand smoking (SHS) in India for persons aged 15 years and above.

METHODS

Nationally representative data on health care expenditures, healthcare utilization, and SHS prevalence were used to estimate economic costs attributable to SHS. A prevalence-based attributable risk approach was used for estimating the attributable direct costs. To estimate the SHS-attributable fraction, the excess utilization of healthcare among SHS exposed non-smokers compared to unexposed non-smokers was estimated using a method of propensity score matching.

RESULTS

The annual direct economic costs attributable to SHS from all diseases in India in the year 2017 for persons aged 15+ years amounted to INR 566.7 billion (USD 8.7 billion). This amounted to INR 705 per adult non-smoker. The SHS attributable costs were higher among the youngest age group 20-24, and women bear 71% of the direct medical costs attributable to SHS.

CONCLUSIONS

The annual direct economic costs of SHS amount to approximately 0.33% of India's GDP, or 8.1% of total healthcare expenditures in India. It is also much larger than the total excise tax revenue from cigarettes and bidis. As bidi smoking is the most popular form of smoking in India and bidis are mostly consumed by the poor, a disproportionate burden of SHS is likely borne by poor households in India.

IMPLICATIONS

In India, 38.7% of adults are exposed to secondhand smoking (SHS) at home and 30.2% at work. However, there is no estimate of the economic burden of any kind from SHS exposure in India. This study used a prevalence-based attributable risk approach combined with a propensity score matching technique to estimate excess healthcare utilization for SHS exposed non-smokers and the annual direct economic costs of SHS in India. Annual direct SHS-attributable costs in India is INR 566.7 billion (USD 8.7 billion) SHS costs constituted 0.33% of GDP and 8.1% of healthcare expenditures in India.

Modeling Healthcare Costs Attributable to Secondhand Smoke Exposure at Home among South Korean Children

Children exposed to secondhand smoke (SHS) are at increased risk for disease. We sought to estimate the medical costs among Korean children who were exposed to SHS at home. A Markov model was developed, including five diseases (asthma, acute otitis media, acute bronchitis, pneumonia and sudden infant death syndrome) that were significantly associated with SHS in children based on a systematic review. The time horizon of the analysis was 20 years (from birth to adulthood), and the cycle length was 1 week. The direct healthcare costs were discounted annually at 5%. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. The Markov model estimated the healthcare costs for 20 years as 659.61 USD per exposed child, an increase of approximately 30% compared to the cost per unexposed child (507.32 USD). Sensitivity analysis suggested that the younger the age of the exposure, the greater the incremental healthcare costs incurred, implying that infants and young children were especially vulnerable to the SHS exposure. Findings of this study could provide key baseline data for future economic evaluations on SHS control policies in South Korea.

Burden of disease attributable to second-hand smoke exposure: A systematic review

Our aim was to provide a systematic review of studies on the burden of disease due to second-hand smoke (SHS) exposure, reviewing methods, exposure assessment, diseases causally linked to SHS, health outcomes, and estimates available to date. A literature review of studies on the burden of disease from SHS exposure, available in PubMed and SCOPUS, published 2007-2018 in English language, was carried out following the PRISMA recommendations. Overall, 588 studies were first identified, and 94 were eligible. Seventy-two studies were included in the systematic review. Most of them were based on the comparative risk assessment approach, assessing SHS exposure using mainly surveys on exposure at home/workplaces. Diseases more frequently studied were: lung cancer, ischemic heart disease, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma and breast cancer in adults; lower respiratory tract infection, otitis media, asthma, sudden infant death syndrome and low birth weight in children. The SHS exposure assessment and the reported population attributable fractions (PAF) were largely heterogeneous. As an example, the PAF from lung cancer varied between 0.6% and 20.5%. Moreover, PAF were estimated applying relative risks and SHS exposures with no consistent definitions or with different age classes. The research gap on the SHS exposure burden is shrinking. However, estimates are not yet available for a number of countries, particularly the Middle Eastern and African countries, and not all diseases with the strongest evidence of causation, such as sudden infant death syndrome, have been explored. Moreover, in some cases the applied methodology revealed relatively low quality of data.

Tobacco Cost of Illness Studies: A Systematic Review

Introduction

To identify studies reporting costs arising from tobacco use and detail their (1) economic approaches, (2) health outcomes, and (3) other cost areas included.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, EconLit, and Google Scholar for studies published between 2008 and April 2018 in English. Eligible articles reported tobacco-related costs and included all tobacco-using populations (multinational, national, subpopulations, and involuntary smokers). All economic approaches that resulted in monetary outcomes were included. We reported USD or converted local currencies to USD. Two health economists extracted and two researchers independently reviewed the data.

Results

From 4083 articles, we reviewed 361 abstracts and examined 79 full-texts, with 63 (1.6%) deemed eligible. There were three multinational, thirty-four national, twenty-one subpopulation or condition(s)-specific analyses, and five evaluating involuntary smoking. The diverse approaches and outcomes precluded integrating costs, but these were substantial in all studies. For instance, about USD 1436 billion in global health expenditures and productivity losses in 2012 and USD 9 billion in lost productivity in China, Brazil, and South Africa in 2012. At the national level, costs ranged from USD 4665 in annual per respondent health expenses (Germany 2006–2008) to USD 289–332.5 billion in medical expenses (United States 1964–2014).

Conclusions

Despite wide variations in the methods used, the identified costs of tobacco are substantial. Studies on tobacco cost-of-illness use diverse methods and hence produce data that are not readily comparable across populations, time, and studies, precluding a consistent evidence-base for action and measurement of progress. Recommendations are made to improve comparability.

Implications

In addition to the health and financial costs to individual smokers, smoking imposes costs on the broader community. Production of comparable estimates of the societal cost of tobacco use is impaired by a plethora of economic models and inconsistently included costs and conditions. These inconsistencies also cause difficulties in comparing relative impacts caused by differing factors. The review systematically documents the post-2007 literature on tobacco cost-of-illness estimations and details conditions and costs included. We hope this will encourage replication of models across settings to provide more consistent data, able to be integrated across populations, over time, and across risk factors.

Healthcare costs attributable to secondhand smoke exposure at home for U.S. adults

OBJECTIVE

To estimate healthcare costs attributable to secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure at home among nonsmoking adults (18+) in the U.S.

METHODS

We analyzed data on nonsmoking adults (N=67,735) from the 2000, 2005, and 2010 (the latest available data on SHS exposure at home) U.S. National Health Interview Surveys. This study was conducted from 2015 to 2017. We examined hospital nights, home care visits, doctor visits, and emergency room (ER) visits. For each, we analyzed the association of SHS exposure at home with healthcare utilization with a Zero-Inflated Poisson regression model controlling for socio-demographic and other risk characteristics. Excess healthcare utilization attributable to SHS exposure at home was determined and multiplied by unit costs derived from the 2014 Medical Expenditures Panel Survey to determine annual SHS-attributable healthcare costs.

RESULTS

SHS exposure at home was positively associated with hospital nights and ER visits, but was not statistically associated with home care visits and doctor visits. Exposed adults had 1.28 times more hospital nights and 1.16 times more ER visits than non-exposed adults. Annual SHS-attributable healthcare costs totaled $4.6 billion (including $3.8 billion for hospital nights and $0.8 billion for ER visits, 2014 dollars) in 2000, $2.1 billion (including $1.8 billion for hospital nights and $0.3 billion for ER visits) in 2005, and $1.9 billion (including $1.6 billion for hospital nights and $0.4 billion for ER visits) in 2010.

CONCLUSIONS

SHS-attributable costs remain high, but have fallen over time. Tobacco control efforts are needed to further reduce SHS exposure at home and associated healthcare costs.

Modeling lifetime costs and health outcomes attributable to secondhand smoke exposure at home among Korean adult women

PURPOSE

The aim of this research is to estimate lifetime costs and health consequences for Korean adult women who were exposed to secondhand smoke (SHS) at home.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to project the lifetime healthcare costs and health outcomes of a hypothetical cohort of Korean women who are 40 years old and were married to current smokers. The Korean epidemiological data were used to reflect the natural history of SHS-exposed and non-exposed women. The direct healthcare costs (in 2014 US dollars) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were annually discounted at 5% to reflect time preference. The time horizon of the analysis was lifetime and the cycle length was 1 year. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

In the absence of SHS exposure, Korean women will live 41.32 years or 34.56 QALYs before discount, which corresponded to 17.29 years or 15.35 QALYs after discount. The SHS-exposed women were predicted to live 37.91 years and 31.08 QALYs before discount and 16.76 years and 14.62 QALYs after discount. The estimated lifetime healthcare cost per woman in the SHS non-exposed group was US$11 214 before the discount and US$2465 after discount. The negative impact of SHS exposure on health outcomes and healthcare costs escalated as the time horizon increased, suggesting that the adverse impact of SHS exposure may have higher impact on the later part of the lifetime. The result was consistent across a wide range of assumptions.

CONCLUSION

Life expectancy might underestimate the impact of SHS exposure on health outcomes, especially if the time horizon of the analysis is not long enough. Early intervention on smoking behaviour could substantially reduce direct healthcare costs and improve quality of life attributable to SHS exposure.

Developing Approaches for Evaluating Smoke-Free Policies

This article describes how several tobacco control organizations identified and responded to an emerging need for technical assistance on how to evaluate smoke-free policies. The authors outline the purposes of evaluating smoke-free policies and present examples of evaluation approaches and tools. Examples are provided of how evaluation has been used to advance the adoption, implementation, and defense of smoke-free policies. Opportunities for further research are identified. Finally, the authors review lessons learned and discuss their implications for evaluating policy initiatives addressing other public health issues.

The Economic Impact of Smoking and of Reducing Smoking Prevalence: Review of Evidence

BACKGROUND

Tobacco smoking is the cause of many preventable diseases and premature deaths in the UK and around the world. It poses enormous health- and non-health-related costs to the affected individuals, employers, and the society at large. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that, globally, smoking causes over US$500 billion in economic damage each year.

OBJECTIVES

This paper examines global and UK evidence on the economic impact of smoking prevalence and evaluates the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of smoking cessation measures.

STUDY SELECTION

SEARCH METHODS We used two major health care/economic research databases, namely PubMed and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) database that contains the British National Health Service (NHS) Economic Evaluation Database; Cochrane Library of systematic reviews in health care and health policy; and other health-care-related bibliographic sources. We also performed hand searching of relevant articles, health reports, and white papers issued by government bodies, international health organizations, and health intervention campaign agencies. SELECTION CRITERIA The paper includes cost-effectiveness studies from medical journals, health reports, and white papers published between 1992 and July 2014, but included only eight relevant studies before 1992. Most of the papers reviewed reported outcomes on smoking prevalence, as well as the direct and indirect costs of smoking and the costs and benefits of smoking cessation interventions. We excluded papers that merely described the effectiveness of an intervention without including economic or cost considerations. We also excluded papers that combine smoking cessation with the reduction in the risk of other diseases. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS The included studies were assessed against criteria indicated in the Cochrane Reviewers Handbook version 5.0.0. OUTCOMES ASSESSED IN THE REVIEWPrimary outcomes of the selected studies are smoking prevalence, direct and indirect costs of smoking, and the costs and benefits of smoking cessation interventions (eg, "cost per quitter", "cost per life year saved", "cost per quality-adjusted life year gained," "present value" or "net benefits" from smoking cessation, and "cost savings" from personal health care expenditure).

MAIN RESULTS

The main findings of this study are as follows: The costs of smoking can be classified into direct, indirect, and intangible costs. About 15% of the aggregate health care expenditure in high-income countries can be attributed to smoking. In the US, the proportion of health care expenditure attributable to smoking ranges between 6% and 18% across different states. In the UK, the direct costs of smoking to the NHS have been estimated at between £2.7 billion and £5.2 billion, which is equivalent to around 5% of the total NHS budget each year. The economic burden of smoking estimated in terms of GDP reveals that smoking accounts for approximately 0.7% of China's GDP and approximately 1% of US GDP. As part of the indirect (non-health-related) costs of smoking, the total productivity losses caused by smoking each year in the US have been estimated at US$151 billion.The costs of smoking notwithstanding, it produces some potential economic benefits. The economic activities generated from the production and consumption of tobacco provides economic stimulus. It also produces huge tax revenues for most governments, especially in high-income countries, as well as employment in the tobacco industry. Income from the tobacco industry accounts for up to 7.4% of centrally collected government revenue in China. Smoking also yields cost savings in pension payments from the premature death of smokers.Smoking cessation measures could range from pharmacological treatment interventions to policy-based measures, community-based interventions, telecoms, media, and technology (TMT)-based interventions, school-based interventions, and workplace interventions.The cost per life year saved from the use of pharmacological treatment interventions ranged between US$128 and US$1,450 and up to US$4,400 per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) saved. The use of pharmacotherapies such as varenicline, NRT, and Bupropion, when combined with GP counseling or other behavioral treatment interventions (such as proactive telephone counseling and Web-based delivery), is both clinically effective and cost effective to primary health care providers.Price-based policy measures such as increase in tobacco taxes are unarguably the most effective means of reducing the consumption of tobacco. A 10% tax-induced cigarette price increase anywhere in the world reduces smoking prevalence by between 4% and 8%. Net public benefits from tobacco tax, however, remain positive only when tax rates are between 42.9% and 91.1%. The cost effectiveness ratio of implementing non-price-based smoking cessation legislations (such as smoking restrictions in work places, public places, bans on tobacco advertisement, and raising the legal age of smokers) range from US$2 to US$112 per life year gained (LYG) while reducing smoking prevalence by up to 30%-82% in the long term (over a 50-year period).Smoking cessation classes are known to be most effective among community-based measures, as they could lead to a quit rate of up to 35%, but they usually incur higher costs than other measures such as self-help quit-smoking kits. On average, community pharmacist-based smoking cessation programs yield cost savings to the health system of between US$500 and US$614 per LYG.Advertising media, telecommunications, and other technology-based interventions (such as TV, radio, print, telephone, the Internet, PC, and other electronic media) usually have positive synergistic effects in reducing smoking prevalence especially when combined to deliver smoking cessation messages and counseling support. However, the outcomes on the cost effectiveness of TMT-based measures have been inconsistent, and this made it difficult to attribute results to specific media. The differences in reported cost effectiveness may be partly attributed to varying methodological approaches including varying parametric inputs, differences in national contexts, differences in advertising campaigns tested on different media, and disparate levels of resourcing between campaigns. Due to its universal reach and low implementation costs, online campaign appears to be substantially more cost effective than other media, though it may not be as effective in reducing smoking prevalence.School-based smoking prevalence programs tend to reduce short-term smoking prevalence by between 30% and 70%. Total intervention costs could range from US$16,400 to US$580,000 depending on the scale and scope of intervention. The cost effectiveness of school-based programs show that one could expect a saving of approximately between US$2,000 and US$20,000 per QALY saved due to averted smoking after 2-4 years of follow-up.Workplace-based interventions could represent a sound economic investment to both employers and the society at large, achieving a benefit-cost ratio of up to 8.75 and generating 12-month employer cost savings of between $150 and $540 per nonsmoking employee. Implementing smoke-free workplaces would also produce myriads of new quitters and reduce the amount of cigarette consumption, leading to cost savings in direct medical costs to primary health care providers. Workplace interventions are, however, likely to yield far greater economic benefits over the long term, as reduced prevalence will lead to a healthier and more productive workforce.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that the direct costs and externalities to society of smoking far outweigh any benefits that might be accruable at least when considered from the perspective of socially desirable outcomes (ie, in terms of a healthy population and a productive workforce). There are enormous differences in the application and economic measurement of smoking cessation measures across various types of interventions, methodologies, countries, economic settings, and health care systems, and these may have affected the comparability of the results of the studies reviewed. However, on the balance of probabilities, most of the cessation measures reviewed have not only proved effective but also cost effective in delivering the much desired cost savings and net gains to individuals and primary health care providers.

The economic burden of exposure to secondhand smoke for child and adult never smokers residing in U.S. public housing

OBJECTIVE

The World Health Organization (WHO) reports that nonsmokers experience disease and death due to secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure in the home. We estimated the total excess burden and costs to society due to SHS exposure in U.S. public housing.

METHODS

We quantified the public health burden for outcomes causally related to SHS exposure for nationally representative never-smoking residents in U.S. public housing using (1) WHO-recommended health outcomes and methodology, (2) publicly available and other large databases, and (3) published estimates of morbidity and mortality rates. We used published estimates of direct medical and nonmedical care costs and the value of productivity losses to estimate SHS-related societal costs for disease and death. We estimated the public health and economic burden for two serum cotinine limits of detection (LODs): 0.05 nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL) and 0.015 ng/mL.

RESULTS

In 2011, an estimated 37,791 never-smoking child and adult U.S. public housing residents experienced illness and death due to SHS exposure at home based on an LOD=0.05 ng/mL (50,967 residents at LOD=0.015 ng/mL). Costs incurred by society for these illnesses and deaths totaled $183 million (LOD=0.05 ng/mL) and $267 million (LOD=0.015 ng/mL) annually. Of the total costs, direct costs (medical and nonmedical) accounted for $128 million and $176 million for LOD=0.05 ng/mL and LOD=0.015 ng/mL, respectively. Medical care accounted for the majority of direct costs-$110 million at LOD=0.05 ng/mL and $153 million at LOD=0.015 ng/mL. Adverse respiratory health outcomes accounted for approximately one-half (56% at LOD=0.05 ng/mL and 52% at LOD=0.015 ng/mL) of total societal costs.

CONCLUSION

Implementing smoke-free policies in all U.S. public housing could save lives and decrease SHS-related morbidity and mortality in never-smoking residents, resulting in annual societal savings of $183 million at LOD=0.05 ng/mL and $267 million at LOD=0.015 ng/mL.

National and state cost savings associated with prohibiting smoking in subsidized and public housing in the United States

Introduction

Despite progress in implementing smoke-free laws in indoor public places and workplaces, millions of Americans remain exposed to secondhand smoke at home. The nation’s 80 million multiunit housing residents, including the nearly 7 million who live in subsidized or public housing, are especially susceptible to secondhand smoke infiltration between units.

Methods

We calculated national and state costs that could have been averted in 2012 if smoking were prohibited in all US subsidized housing, including public housing: 1) secondhand smoke-related direct health care, 2) renovation of smoking-permitted units; and 3) smoking-attributable fires. Annual cost savings were calculated by using residency estimates from the Department of Housing and Urban Development and cost data reported elsewhere. Data were adjusted for inflation and variations in state costs. National and state estimates (excluding Alaska and the District of Columbia) were calculated by cost type.

Results

Prohibiting smoking in subsidized housing would yield annual cost savings of $496.82 million (range, $258.96–$843.50 million), including $310.48 million ($154.14–$552.34 million) in secondhand smoke-related health care, $133.77 million ($75.24–$209.01 million) in renovation expenses, and $52.57 million ($29.57–$82.15 million) in smoking-attributable fire losses. By state, cost savings ranged from $0.58 million ($0.31–$0.94 million) in Wyoming to $124.68 million ($63.45–$216.71 million) in New York. Prohibiting smoking in public housing alone would yield cost savings of $152.91 million ($79.81–$259.28 million); by state, total cost savings ranged from $0.13 million ($0.07–$0.22 million) in Wyoming to $57.77 million ($29.41–$100.36 million) in New York.

Conclusion

Prohibiting smoking in all US subsidized housing, including public housing, would protect health and could generate substantial societal cost savings.

The cost of secondhand smoke exposure at home in California

OBJECTIVE

Healthcare and mortality costs of secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure at home among non-smokers in California were estimated for the year 2009.

METHODS

Costs were estimated with an epidemiological model using California SHS home exposure rates and published relative risks. Healthcare costs included nine conditions, and mortality was estimated for four perinatal and three adult conditions. Three mortality-related measures were estimated: deaths, years of potential life lost (YPLL) and the value of lost productivity.

RESULTS

SHS-attributable healthcare costs totalled over $241 million. The most costly conditions for children and adolescents were attention deficit hyperactivity disorder ($7.8 million) and middle ear disease ($5.6 million). For adults, the most costly conditions were ischaemic heart disease (IHD) ($130.0 million) and asthma ($67.4 million). Deaths of 821 Californians were attributable to SHS exposure in the home, including 27 infants whose mothers smoked while pregnant and 700 adults who died from IHD. These deaths represented a loss of over 13 000 YPLL and $119 million in lost productivity.

CONCLUSIONS

The economic impact of SHS exposure in the home totalled $360 million in California in 2009. Policies that reduce exposure to SHS at home have great potential for reducing healthcare and mortality costs.

Cost savings associated with prohibiting smoking in U.S. subsidized housing

BACKGROUND

Tobacco smoking in multiunit housing can lead to secondhand-smoke (SHS) exposure among nonsmokers, increased maintenance costs for units where smoking is permitted, and fire risks. During 2009-2010, approximately 7.1 million individuals lived in subsidized housing in the U.S., a large proportion of which were children, elderly, or disabled.

PURPOSE

This study calculated the annual economic costs to society that could be averted by prohibiting smoking in all U.S. subsidized housing.

METHODS

Estimated annual cost savings associated with SHS-related health care, renovation of units that permit smoking, and smoking-attributable fires in U.S. subsidized housing were calculated using residency estimates from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and previously reported national and state cost estimates for these indicators. When state estimates were used, a price deflator was applied to account for differential costs of living or pricing across states. Estimates were calculated overall and by cost type for all U.S. subsidized housing, as well as for public housing only. Data were obtained and analyzed between January and March 2011.

RESULTS

Prohibiting smoking in all U.S. subsidized housing would yield cost savings of approximately $521 million per year, including $341 million in SHS-related healthcare expenditures, $108 million in renovation expenses, and $72 million in smoking-attributable fire losses. Prohibiting smoking in U.S. public housing alone would yield cost savings of approximately $154 million per year.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to prohibit smoking in all U.S. subsidized housing would protect health and generate substantial cost savings to society.

Burden of household environmental tobacco smoke on medical expenditure for Japanese women: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

The economic consequences of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) have been simulated using models. We examined the individual-level association between ETS exposure and medical costs among Japanese nonsmoking women.

METHODS

This population-based cohort study enrolled women aged 40 to 79 years living in a rural community. ETS exposure in homes at baseline was assessed with a self-administered questionnaire. We then collected health insurance claims data on direct medical expenditures from 1995 through 2007. Using generalized linear models with interaction between ETS exposure level and age stratum, average total monthly expenditure (inpatient plus outpatient care) per capita for nonsmoking women highly exposed and moderately exposed to ETS were compared with expenditures for unexposed women. We performed separate analyses for survivors and nonsurvivors.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from 4870 women. After adjustment for potential confounding factors, survivors aged 70 to 79 who were highly exposed to ETS incurred higher expenditures than those who were not exposed. We found no significant difference in expenditures between moderately exposed and unexposed women. Total expenditures were not significantly associated with ETS exposure among survivors aged 40 to 69 or nonsurvivors of any age stratum.

CONCLUSIONS

We calculated individual-level excess medical expenditures attributable to household exposure to ETS among surviving older women. The findings provide direct evidence of the economic burden of ETS, which is helpful for policymakers who seek to achieve the economically attractive goal of eliminating ETS.

Protecting the world from secondhand tobacco smoke exposure: where do we stand and where do we go from here?

INTRODUCTION

Article 8 of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control mandates all signatory countries to "protect citizens from exposure to tobacco smoke in workplaces, public transport and indoor public places." Even though there has been great progress in the implementation of Article 8, still most of the world population remains exposed to secondhand smoke (SHS). In this article, we sought to summarize the research that supports Article 8, where do we stand, and current research gaps and future directions.

DISCUSSION

Secondhand smoke is an established cause of heart disease and several types of cancer. Additional research is needed to reach final conclusions for diseases where evidence is only suggestive of causality. The only solution to SHS exposure in public places is banning smoking indoors. Research on the gaming industry and nightclubs, particularly in developing countries, needs to be disseminated to support their inclusion in smoke-free laws. Aside from indoor bans, additional research is needed for outdoor and multiunit housing bans and in support of measures that protect children and other vulnerable populations. The impact of smoke-free laws on other health outcomes, besides heart disease and respiratory outcomes, is another area where further research is needed. Thirdhand smoke assessment and health effects are also likely to be a topic of further research. As new tobacco products emerge, evaluating SHS exposure and effects will be vital.

CONCLUSIONS

Furthering research in support of Article 8 can contribute to reach the final goal of protecting everyone from SHS exposure.

Methods in public health services and systems research: a systematic review

CONTEXT

Public Health Services and Systems Research (PHSSR) is concerned with evaluating the organization, financing, and delivery of public health services and their impact on public health. The strength of the current PHSSR evidence is somewhat dependent on the methods used to examine the field. Methods used in PHSSR articles, reports, and other documents were reviewed to assess their methodologic strengths and challenges in light of PHSSR goals.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A total of 364 documents from the PHSSR library met the inclusion criteria as empirical and based in the U.S. After additional exclusions, 327 of these were analyzed.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A detailed codebook was used to classify articles in terms of (1) study design; (2) sampling; (3) instrumentation; (4) data collection; (5) data analysis; and (6) study validity. Inter-coder reliability was assessed for the codebook; once it was found reliable, the available empirical documents were coded.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there has been a dramatic increase in the amount of published PHSSR recently, methods used remain primarily cross-sectional and descriptive. Moreover, although appropriate for exploratory and foundational work in a new field, these approaches are limiting progress toward some PHSSR goals. Recommendations are given to advance and strengthen the methods used in PHSSR to better meet the goals and challenges facing the field.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of India's 2008 prohibition of smoking in public places in Gujarat

Tobacco smoking and exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke are associated with disability and premature mortality in low and middle-income countries. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of implementing India's Prohibition of Smoking in Public Places Rules in the state of Gujarat, compared to implementation of a complete smoking ban. Using standard cost-effectiveness analysis methods, the cost of implementing the alternatives was evaluated against the years of life saved and cases of acute myocardial infarction averted by reductions in smoking prevalence and secondhand smoke exposure. After one year, it is estimated that a complete smoking ban in Gujarat would avert 17,000 additional heart attacks and gain 438,000 life years (LY). A complete ban is highly cost-effective when key variables including legislation effectiveness were varied in the sensitivity analyses. Without including medical treatment costs averted, the cost-effectiveness ratio ranges from $2 to $112 per LY gained and $37 to $386 per acute myocardial infarction averted. Implementing a complete smoking ban would be a cost saving alternative to the current partial legislation in terms of reducing tobacco-attributable disease in Gujarat.

Landlord attitudes and behaviors regarding smoke-free policies: implications for voluntary policy change

OBJECTIVE

The study purpose was to describe multiunit landlord attitudes and behaviors toward smoke-free policies.

DESIGN AND SAMPLE

This was a descriptive, cross-sectional survey of multiunit landlords in Douglas County (N=392).

MEASURES

A 25-item survey was developed and pilot tested. It was administered by telephone (n=143) and mail (n=249) to multiunit landlords.

RESULTS

Combined response rate was 30.1% (81/143 telephone, 37/249 mail) representing 24,080 units on 974 properties with 34,399 tenants. Most respondents (73.7%) allowed smoking. Reasons for not implementing smoke-free policies were potential enforcement problems (57.0%), tenant objections (43.0%), loss of market share (39.5%). Respondents without smoke-free policies expected vacancy (53.6%) and turnover (50.0%) rates to increase, which was significantly different (p <.0001) than respondents with smoke-free policies where only 10.7% reported increased vacancy and only 3.7% reported increased turnover.

CONCLUSIONS

Expected adverse impacts of smoke-free policies do not reflect real experiences of smoke-free policy implementation. Public health advocates can use these study findings to develop community-based education and social marketing messages directed at voluntary smoke-free policy changes. Respondents without smoke-free policies expressed interest at the end of the survey in learning how to implement smoke-free policies indicating a readiness for change.