Search

INTRODUCTION Due to a continuing international trend of decentralization of public health policies, local governments are given an increasingly important role in tobacco control. The process of developing local-level tobacco control policies is an underexplored topic. This study uses grant applications as a data source to gain insight into the planning, development and proposed implementation of local tobacco control policies by regional public health departments in the Netherlands. METHODS Grant applications of 24 regional public health departments were analyzed using the second stage of the rational policy cycle, a four-stages policy model about the decisions made by local policy makers during the policy process. We coded the applications with open and axial coding. RESULTS Public health departments formulated four main goals for tobacco control: adding tobacco control policies to existing local policy documents, creating smokefree (child) environments, developing and improving access to smoking cessation care, and participating in media campaigns. Public health departments often specify tobacco control aims and involve partners in reaching these aims. However, the grant applications lacked information about implementing these tobacco control policies. CONCLUSIONS The information on implementation strategies and process evaluation, as well as the (evidence-based) legitimation for the policy choices, needs improvement. Under the current conditions, which include the brief explanation the departments received, an unclear mandate, insufficient funding, and local restricting factors such as time and knowledge, significant contributions to tobacco control policy cannot be expected from local governments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

IntroductionSeveral states implemented comprehensive smoke-free laws in workplaces (14 states), restaurants (17 states), and bars (13 states) between 2002 and 2007. We tested the hypothesis that public support for smoke-free laws increases at a higher rate in states that implemented smoke-free laws between 2002 and 2007 (group A) than in states that implemented smoke-free laws after that time or not at all (group B). The period before the implementation (1992-2001) was also considered.MethodsData was used from the Current Population Survey (CPS) Tobacco Use Supplements (TUS), which is representative for the U.S. adult population. Respondents were asked whether they thought smoking should not be allowed in indoor work areas, restaurants, and bars and cocktail lounges. Differences in trends were analyzed with binomial mixed effects models.ResultsPopulation support for smoke-free restaurants and bars was higher among group A than among group B before 2002. After 2002, support for smoke-free restaurants and bars increased at a higher rate among group A than among group B. Population support for smoke-free workplaces did not differ between group A and B, and the increase in support for smoke-free workplaces also did not differ between these groups.ConclusionsThe positive association between the implementation of smoke-free restaurant and bar laws and the rate of increase in support for these laws partly supported the hypothesis. The implementation of the laws may have caused support to increase, but also states that have higher support may have been more likely to implement smoke-free laws.

Introduction Professional behavioral counseling for smoking cessation can be delivered in many forms, which may not work equally well for everyone. We aim to explore in a real-world setting whether different delivery modes yield different rates of quit success and whether quit success varies based on gender, age, educational level, and being treated for a health condition. Aims and Methods We used monitoring data (n = 13 747) from a smoking cessation counseling provider in the Netherlands (September 2018 to August 2021) to compare differences in quit success immediately after the end of counseling and at 12-month follow-up between telephone and other modes of counseling. Participants chose which mode of counseling they received. At the 12-month follow-up, we also examined differences in quit success based on demographic characteristics and whether one is being treated for various health conditions. Results Participants of in-person group counseling and online in-company group counseling were significantly more likely to have quit immediately after the counseling compared with telephone counseling (OR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.08–1.44; OR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.18–2.24). Analyses revealed no significant differences in quit success between telephone and other modes of counseling after 12 months. Those treated for a respiratory or psychological condition were less likely to have maintained quit success, as were women, and participants with a lower educational level. Conclusions When chosen by oneself, the mode of smoking cessation counseling received does not appear to be important for long-term quit success. However, certain groups warrant extra support to prevent excessive program attrition and unsuccessful quit attempts. Implications Our findings suggest that when chosen by oneself, the delivery mode of smoking cessation counseling does not appear to be important for long-term quit success. This finding is of particular relevance for those who are unable to attend in-person cessation counseling due to, for instance, reduced accessibility or mobility. We also found that women, lower educated, and younger participants were more likely to dropout of the cessation program or to not have maintained a quit attempt, signaling that disparities in smoking cessation persist when standardized counseling is given, and therefore more tailored counseling may be necessary for these groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]