|
|
||||||||
RESEARCH AND PRACTICE |
Sara M. Abrams, Martin C. Mahoney, Andrew Hyland, and K. Michael Cummings are with the Division of Cancer Prevention and Population Sciences, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, and the Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health & Health Professions of the State University of New York at Buffalo. Warren Davis is with the Division of Cancer Prevention and Population Sciences, Roswell Park Cancer Institute. Liguo Song is with the Department of Cell Stress Biology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute.
Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Martin C. Mahoney, MD, PhD, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Division of Cancer Prevention and Population Sciences, Elm and Carlton Sts, Buffalo, NY 14263 (e-mail: martin.mahoney{at}roswellpark.org).
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In July 2003, New York State implemented the Clean Indoor Air Act (CIAA) to reduce exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS). In this cross-sectional study, workers (n=168) completed an interview assessing ETS exposure and provided urine for cotinine analysis. Hospitality workers recruited after implementation of the CIAA had significant reductions in ETS exposure and urine cotinine, compared with those recruited before implementation. The New York State CIAA yielded measurable reductions in ETS exposure for hospitality workers.
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
A structured interview was used to identify ETS exposures on each of the 4 previous days and on the date of the interview. For each reported exposure, participants indicated location (i.e., home, work, other) and number of hours exposed. Measures of exposure included number of exposures, number of days exposed, and total duration of exposure. Nonsmoking status was bioverified with a carbon monoxide breath test (<8 parts per million carbon monoxide in expired breath).
We also collected a 50-mL urine sample to assess cotinine, a biomarker of ETS exposure. Liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry was used to measure cotinine values.5 The method had a limit of detection of 0.3 ng/mL on the basis of a validation curve.
Because participant recruitment began before implementation of the New York State CIAA, we compared exposures before (prelaw) and after enactment of this law (postlaw) and among employment groups: (1) noncasino hospitality workersemployed in bars, restaurants, bingo halls, or bowling alleys; (2) casino workers; and (3) nonhospitality workers. Casino workers were considered separately from other hospitality workers because all casino workers in this study were employed at American Indianowned casinos that are exempt from the New York State CIAA. Non-casino hospitality workers represent more than 55 different workplaces covered by the New York State CIAA.
Statistical analyses were completed with SPSS 11.0 (SPSS Inc, Chicago, Ill). The
2 test was used to determine whether significant differences in demographic variables existed between the prelaw and postlaw groups. We calculated geometric means and medians for total hours exposed to ETS and cotinine, and we used the MannWhitney test to test for significance.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Among noncasino hospitality workers, a 71% reduction in reported exposures to ETS occurred during the 4 days prior to the interview following implementation of the CIAA (median of 20.8 hours exposed prelaw vs 6.0 hours postlaw; P<.05), which was generally attributable to lessened ETS exposure at work. No significant change in reported exposures was seen among casino workers (median of 18.0 hours exposed prelaw vs 19.8 hours postlaw) or nonhospitality workers (3.0 hours vs 2.3 hours). Duration and sources of ETS exposure during the 4 days preceding the interview are summarized in Table 1
.
|
Additionally, urine cotinine values decreased significantly following implementation of the CIAA among noncasino hospitality workers (median=4.93 ng/mL prelaw vs 0.30 ng/mL postlaw; P<.01) and nonhospitality workers (median=2.03 ng/mL prelaw vs 0.30 ng/mL postlaw; P<.01) (Figure 1
). Numbers of exposures and numbers of days exposed were significantly related to measured cotinine levels among study participants; however, correlation coefficients were relatively modest.
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Educational level was significantly associated with law enactment and with ETS exposure (any vs none; P < .05). Participants with less education were more likely to have been recruited after the CIAA took effect and also were significantly more likely to report ETS exposure (62% of those with some college or less education vs 38% with at least a college degree; P < .05). Any bias introduced into these analyses because of the differences between groups by education leads to understating the effect of the CIAA on exposure estimates.
Data from this study show marked reductions in self-reported exposures to ETS among subjects employed in the hospitality industry, including an 89% decrease for ETS exposures at work. In addition, levels of urinary cotinine offer confirmatory support for reduced exposures to ETS. The CIAA in New York State appears to be achieving its intended objective of protecting workers from exposure to ETS, although these results must be confirmed in a statewide representative sample of hospitality workers.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
The authors wish to thank Jeremy Hemiup for assistance in conducting urinary cotinine analysis.
Human Participant Protection
The Roswell Park Cancer Institute institutional review board approved this study.
| Footnotes |
|---|
Contributors
S.M. Abrams managed data collection, completed the analyses, and led the writing of the brief. M.C. Mahoney, A. Hyland, and K.M. Cummings originated the study and obtained funding support. M. C. Mahoney supervised study implementation and data analysis. W. Davis and L. Song developed the cotinine detection methodology and conducted sample analysis. All authors helped to conceptualize ideas, interpret findings, and review drafts of the brief.
Accepted for publication February 15, 2005.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Hackshaw AK, Law MR, Wald NJ. The accumulated evidence on lung cancer and environmental tobacco smoke. BMJ. 1997;315:980988.
3. Mannino DM, Homa DM, Redd SC. Involuntary smoking and asthma severity in children: data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Chest. 2002;122:409415.
4. Bonita R, Duncan J, Truelsen T, Jackson RT, Beaglehole R. Passive smoking as well as active smoking increases the risk of acute stroke. Tob Control. 1999;8: 156160.
5. Song L, Davis W, Abrams SM, et al. Sensitive and rapid method for the determination of urinary cotinine in nonsmokers: an application for studies assessing exposures to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS). Anal Chim Acta. 2005;545:200208.[CrossRef]
6. SRNT Subcommittee on Biochemical Verification. Biochemical verification of tobacco use and cessation. Nicotine Tob Res. 2002;4:149159.
7. Shopland DR, Anderson CM, Burns DM, Gerlach KK. Disparities in smoke-free workplace policies among food service workers. J Occup Environ Med. 2004;46: 347356.[Web of Science][Medline]
8. Travers MJ, Cummings KM, Bauer U, Hyland A. Effect of New York State Clean Indoor Air Law on employment, alcohol excise tax collections and number of alcohol serving establishments. Paper presented at: Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco Annual Meeting; February 20, 2004; Scottsdale, Ariz.
9. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Indoor air quality in hospitality venues before and after implementation of a clean indoor air lawWestern New York, 2003. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2004;53:10381041.[Medline]
10. Repace J. Respirable particles and carcinogens in the air of Delaware hospitality venues before and after a smoking ban. J Occup Environ Med. 2004;46: 887905.[Web of Science][Medline]
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. C. Fiore and T. B. Baker Stealing a March in the 21st Century: Accelerating Progress in the 100-Year War Against Tobacco Addiction in the United States Am J Public Health, July 1, 2009; 99(7): 1170 - 1175. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Valente, F. Forastiere, A. Bacosi, G. Cattani, S. Di Carlo, M. Ferri, I. Figa-Talamanca, A. Marconi, L. Paoletti, C. Perucci, et al. Exposure to fine and ultrafine particles from secondhand smoke in public places before and after the smoking ban, Italy 2005 Tob. Control, October 1, 2007; 16(5): 312 - 317. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. J. Stark, K. Rohde, J. E. Maher, B. A. Pizacani, C. W. Dent, R. Bard, S. G. Carmella, A. R. Benoit, N. M. Thomson, and S. S. Hecht The Impact of Clean Indoor Air Exemptions and Preemption Policies on the Prevalence of a Tobacco-Specific Lung Carcinogen Among Nonsmoking Bar and Restaurant Workers Am J Public Health, August 1, 2007; 97(8): 1457 - 1463. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Zellers, M. A. Thomas, and M. Ashe Legal Risks to Employers Who Allow Smoking in the Workplace Am J Public Health, August 1, 2007; 97(8): 1376 - 1382. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. S Pickett, S. E Schober, D. J Brody, L. R Curtin, and G. A Giovino Smoke-free laws and secondhand smoke exposure in US non-smoking adults, 1999-2002. Tob. Control, August 1, 2006; 15(4): 302 - 307. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. R. Greenberg The Diffusion of Public Health Innovations Am J Public Health, February 1, 2006; 96(2): 209 - 210. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |