Summary of multiunit housing (MUH) operators’ reports of existing smoke-free building policies, secondhand smoke (SHS) incursions, and support for or interest in smoke-free building policies
| Lead author | Year | Current smoke-free building policy | SHS incursions (perception) | SHS incursions (frequency) | Policy support/interest | Other Assessed indicators |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cramer | 2011 | 16% of respondents reported a smoke-free building policy in all residential units. 10% of reported a partial smoke-free building policy | – | 30.2% of those without a building policy reported complaint of SHS incursion and 55.8% reported no compliant of SHS incursion from tenants | 37% of those without a building policy asked to be contacted with information on smoke-free MUH | Perceived barriers to policy implementation; perceived and actual motivators for policy implementation |
| Jackson | 2011 | 9% of properties had smoke-free building policy in residential units and 34% had a building policy in at least one of the following: interior common areas, residential units and exterior common areas | 53% of property managers reported that SHS could drift from one unit to another. 26% believed that exposure to SHS was a significant issue for residents | – | 94% of those without a building policy were not considering one. 5% of those without a building policy were considering implementing one | Compliance; enforcement; perceived barriers for policy implementation; perceived motivators for policy implementation |
| Hewett | 2007 | 20 operators had designated one or more buildings smoke-free; 14 had designated unsubsidised buildings smoke-free and 7 had designated government subsidised buildings smoke-free | 27% identified tobacco smoke as the most common source of objectionable air moving between apartments. 17% of those without a policy saw SHS transfer as a major health issue for residents compared with 55% of those with a policy | 4% said SHS incursion occurs on a regular or recurring basis in most of their buildings, 14% said some do, 33% said few do and 45% said none do | 25% of respondents said they would be very interested in learning ways to reduce SHS transfer and 41% said they would be somewhat interested | Perceived barriers for policy implementation; perceived motivators for policy implementation; landlord information needs |
| King | 2010 | 9% reported no smoking building policies in all living units they owned and 2% reported smoking restrictions in at least one building | – | – | 75% of those without a building policy were interested in one; interest was higher among those with government subsidised units | Perceived barriers for policy implementation; perceived motivators for policy implementation |
| King | 2011 | 14% of MUH operators reported a smoke-free building policy at baseline compared with 19% 1 year later. Exposure to the intervention did not significantly increase the adoption of a smoke-free building policy | – | – | 72.3% of those without a building policy expressed interest in implementing at baseline and 77.3% expressed interest at follow-up | Perceived barriers for policy implementation |
| Pizacani | 2011 | All 11 building operators had buildings with smoke-free MUH policies in residential units and outdoors spaces | – | – | 73% of those with a building policy were in favour of it | Compliance; enforcement |