Next Article in Journal
Longitudinal Fibular Deficiency: A Cross-Sectional Study Comparing Lower Limb Function of Children and Young People with That of Unaffected Peers
Previous Article in Journal
Morphological and Advanced Imaging of Epilepsy: Beyond the Basics
Previous Article in Special Issue
Regulation of E-Cigarettes in the United States and Its Role in a Youth Epidemic
Open AccessArticle

Smoke-Free Ordinances and Policies Protect Youth, but Ordinances Appear to Have Little Impact on Non-Combustible Tobacco Use

1
Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39759, USA
2
American Academy of Pediatrics Julius B. Richmond Center of Excellence, Elk Grove Village, IL 60143, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Children 2019, 6(3), 44; https://doi.org/10.3390/children6030044
Received: 18 January 2019 / Revised: 4 March 2019 / Accepted: 7 March 2019 / Published: 11 March 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Tobacco and Nicotine Use and Exposure Among Children and Adolescents)
Smoke-free ordinances and policies protect youth from exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) and cigarette use. This study investigated whether smoke-free ordinances also protect youth from the use of other tobacco products. We compared the prevalence of SHS exposure, cigarette smoking, cigar smoking, smokeless tobacco use, and e-cigarette use among high school students living in a municipality with or without a smoke-free ordinance and in homes with and without smoke-free policies. Data were analyzed using the 2017 Mississippi Youth Tobacco Survey (n = 1923). Smoke-free ordinances were found to be associated with lower prevalence of SHS exposure (41.9% vs. 51.5%), cigarette smoking (5.1% vs. 11.4%), and cigar smoking (7.2% vs. 10.9%). There were no differences in smokeless tobacco use (6.6% vs. 6.5%) or e-cigarette use (11.2% vs 12.1%). Smoke-free homes were associated with lower prevalence of SHS exposure (38.0% vs 74.6%), cigarette smoking (4.8% vs. 17.6%), cigar smoking (6.4% vs. 16.4%), smokeless tobacco use (4.9% vs. 13.2%), and e-cigarette use (9.6% vs. 19.5%), p < 0.05 for all comparisons. The results suggest that smoke-free ordinances and policies protect against exposure to tobacco smoke and use of combustible tobacco products, but smoke-free ordinances do not protect from smokeless tobacco and e-cigarette use. Tobacco-free, rather than smoke-free, ordinances might offer more protection. View Full-Text
Keywords: smoke-free; tobacco; youth; prevalence; combustible tobacco products; e-cigarette smoke-free; tobacco; youth; prevalence; combustible tobacco products; e-cigarette
MDPI and ACS Style

Valentine, N.; McClelland, E.; McMillen, R. Smoke-Free Ordinances and Policies Protect Youth, but Ordinances Appear to Have Little Impact on Non-Combustible Tobacco Use. Children 2019, 6, 44. https://doi.org/10.3390/children6030044

AMA Style

Valentine N, McClelland E, McMillen R. Smoke-Free Ordinances and Policies Protect Youth, but Ordinances Appear to Have Little Impact on Non-Combustible Tobacco Use. Children. 2019; 6(3):44. https://doi.org/10.3390/children6030044

Chicago/Turabian Style

Valentine, Nell; McClelland, Emily; McMillen, Robert. 2019. "Smoke-Free Ordinances and Policies Protect Youth, but Ordinances Appear to Have Little Impact on Non-Combustible Tobacco Use" Children 6, no. 3: 44. https://doi.org/10.3390/children6030044

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop