Elsevier

Health Policy

Volume 92, Issues 2–3, October 2009, Pages 197-202
Health Policy

Does the workplace-smoking ban eliminate differences in risk for environmental tobacco smoke exposure at work?

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2009.03.009Get rights and content

Abstract

Objectives

A workplace-smoking ban in the Netherlands was introduced on January 1, 2004. Before the ban male and low educated employees were at higher risk for exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS). Effective implementation of the ban should result not only in an overall decline of exposure, but also in the disappearance of systematic differences in exposure between subgroups of employees.

Methods

Data from a Dutch continuous Internet survey were used. From July 2003 through June 2005, 200 respondents were randomly selected each week. The sample consisted of 11,291 non-smoking, working respondents, aged 16–65 years.

Results

ETS exposure decreased among all employees and among subgroups at higher risk before the ban. However, also after the ban, males and low educated employees were still most likely to be exposed to ETS.

Conclusions

The workplace-smoking ban was effective in reducing ETS exposure among employees. However, after the ban still 52.2% of non-smoking workers reported to be exposed. We did not find the expected stronger effect among employees who were at higher risk. Both before and after implementation of the ban, males and lower educated employees were about two times more likely to be exposed to ETS.

Introduction

There is abundant evidence for the health hazards of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), including increased risk for lung cancer, other cancers, coronary heart disease (CHD), respiratory diseases (such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (CODP) and asthma), stroke, and complications of pregnancy such as low birth weight and pre-term delivery [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. The main locations for ETS exposure are workplaces and private homes [8], [9], [10]. Emmons et al. reported that, in the absence of workplace-smoking bans, approximately 50% of the exposure was at the workplace [11]. Hammond found that 29% of the workers were exposed only at work, while 12% were exposed only at home [12].

One of the most effective public health policies to reduce ETS exposure of non-smokers is the implementation of smoking restrictions or total bans at workplaces and public places [2], [3], [13], [14], [15]. In 2007 approximately 50% of the countries in Europe installed anti-smoking laws for workplaces; other countries have limited or no worksite smoking restrictions [16]. In the Netherlands a full workplace-smoking ban has been in place for all worksites (except in bars, cafes and restaurants) since January 2004. Employers are allowed to provide designated smoking rooms.

An effective implementation of the workplace-smoking ban would imply that after the ban there would be no systematic differences in exposure of non-smokers to ETS at the workplace. This would also mean that the ban would lead to a greater reduction in exposure to ETS among those at higher risk before the ban. Most ETS evaluation studies focused on specific categories of workers like hospitality workers or healthcare staff [10], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], or related the level of worksite smoking policy with ETS exposure [23], [24], [25], [26], [27]. Studies in the USA [28], [29], New Zealand [30], UK/Ireland [31], Scotland [32], Spain [33] and Finland [34], evaluated the impact of a national or state-wide workplace-smoking ban on all types of employees. All seven studies revealed significant reductions of ETS exposure at work after implementation of worksite bans [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34]. However, only one of these studies examined the effects in risk groups most exposed to ETS before the ban and thus at the highest risk of acquiring ETS-related health problems [30]. In the present study, we analyze whether the workplace-smoking ban reduced exposure to ETS among all non-smoking employees. However, we also focus more specifically on whether some categories of employees are still at elevated risk for exposure to ETS after the ban. Previous studies suggest that high ETS exposure at work is related to younger age, lower education, blue collar workers and being male [23], [26], [30], [35]. Therefore, we expected that the impact of the ban will be stronger in younger employees, employees with lower education, and male employees. Moreover we expected that, among employees who work more hours, the differences before and after the ban would be larger, because they spend more of their time in an environment that was changed by the introduction of the smoking ban. Specific for the Netherlands is that government-related agencies implemented a workplace-smoking ban as early as 1990. Assuming that this ban had an effect, it is likely that the 2004 national workplace-smoking ban has had less effect on employees working at government-related agencies.

Section snippets

Study design and setting

The Continuous Survey of Smoking Habits (CSSH) monitors smoking prevalence and smoking habits in the Dutch population. Each week 200 respondents are randomly selected from a database of 140,000 respondents representative for the Dutch population aged 15 years and older. To ensure the representativeness, the sample is weighted to region, urbanisation, gender, age, household, education and activity. The subjects were approached by Internet to fill in a questionnaire. For the present study, data

Impact of the ban on the general working population

The first research question addressed the impact of the workplace-smoking ban on self-reported ETS exposure in the general working population. Fig. 1 presents the percentages of employees reporting ‘being exposed to ETS at work’. Despite rather large fluctuations per week in the proportion of employees reporting to be exposed, the figure shows that after the ban a smaller proportion of the employees reported to be exposed to ETS. In the weeks before the ban 70.7% of the employees reported being

Discussion

The first conclusion of this study is that the workplace-smoking ban in the Netherlands has led to a decrease in the proportion of employees reporting to be exposed to ETS; however, it should be noted that even after the ban the proportion of non-smoking workers reporting to be exposed (51.9%) is still rather high. The decrease also occurred in groups, which before the ban had an elevated risk for exposure to ETS. However, we did not see the expected stronger effect among groups of employees

Conclusions

The Dutch workplace-smoking ban led to a decrease in ETS exposure. However, also after the ban still 52% of the employees report to be exposed to ETS during work, although less frequently than before the ban. It would be worthwhile to explore the specific conditions that influence the effectiveness of the ban to protect the non-smoking workers. Furthermore, it is also clear that the groups at elevated risk (male and low-educated employees) are still more often exposed to smoking colleagues

References (42)

  • J.L. Pirkle et al.

    Exposure of the US population to environmental tobacco smoke: the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988 to 1991

    JAMA

    (1996)
  • L.G. Pucci

    Implementing restrictive smoking policies: an overview of worksite intervention studies

    Eur J Public Health

    (1991)
  • K.M. Emmons et al.

    Exposure to environmental tobacco smoke in naturalistic settings

    Am J Public Health

    (1992)
  • S.K. Hammond

    Exposure of U.S. workers to environmental tobacco smoke

    Environ Health Perspect

    (1999)
  • C.M. Fichtenberg et al.

    Effect of smoke-free workplaces on smoking behaviour: systematic review

    BMJ

    (2002)
  • S.J. Haw et al.

    Changes in exposure of adult non-smokers to secondhand smoke after implementation of smoke-free legislation in Scotland: national cross-sectional survey

    BMJ

    (2007)
  • European Network for Smoking Prevention European trends toward smoke-free provisions; April 2007...
  • S. Allwright et al.

    Legislation for smoke-free workplaces and health of bar workers in Ireland: before and after study

    BMJ

    (2005)
  • T.M. Eagan et al.

    Decline in respiratory symptoms in service workers five months after a public smoking ban

    Tob Control

    (2006 Jun)
  • D.G. Ellingsen et al.

    Airborne exposure and biological monitoring of bar and restaurant workers before and after the introduction of a smoking ban

    J Environ Monit

    (2006)
  • M.C. Farrelly et al.

    Changes in hospitality workers’ exposure to secondhand smoke following the implementation of New York's smoke-free law

    Tob Control

    (2005)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text