American Journal of Preventive Medicine
Review articleSmokefree Legislation: A Review of Health and Economic Outcomes Research
Introduction
Smokefree legislation is a powerful public health intervention.1 There is a wealth of research showing the health benefits to entire populations when communities implement smokefree laws and/or regulations. Exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) decreases, indoor air quality improves, workers are protected, adult and youth smoking levels decrease, smokers are more likely to quit, acute myocardial infarctions (AMI) and asthma exacerbations decline, and infant/birth outcomes may improve. In addition to health benefits, economic studies confirm that smokefree laws do not hurt business revenues or operating costs.
Smokefree laws reduce exposure to SHS. After Scotland's smokefree legislation was implemented, there was a 39% reduction in salivary cotinine among nonsmoking primary schoolchildren, especially among those with nonsmoking parents,2 and a similar reduction in adults.3 Similarly, adults in Spain self-reported an overall 22% reduction in exposure to SHS following their smokefree law, with the greatest reductions in the workplace.4 A New Zealand study recruited volunteer patrons and measured salivary cotinine before and after a 3-hour visit to a bar, and reported a 90% reduction after the smokefree legislation.5 Further, the more extensive the smokefree law, the lower the serum cotinine among nonsmoking adults.6 Massachusetts adults living in a town with strong restaurant and bar smoking restrictions self-reported lower exposure to SHS compared to those living in towns that allowed smoking in restaurants and bars.7
Despite a global trend to adopt smokefree legislation, it is estimated that 53% of Americans remain unprotected by comprehensive smokefree workplace laws that include restaurants and bars.8 As of July 5, 2010, there were 3161 U.S. municipalities and 39 states that had laws or regulations restricting where smoking is allowed; however, only 405 municipalities and 22 states had comprehensive protection (Table 1).9 There is much work to do in protecting the entire population from SHS exposure. An emerging body of literature documents not only that disparities in health protections remain among subpopulations, but also that health outcomes of smokefree legislation may vary by gender, race/ethnicity, SES, and age.
The purpose of this paper is to review the research on the health and economic outcomes of smokefree legislation. Other reviews have examined the effects of voluntary or private sector policies on smoking prevalence and cessation behaviors.10 The focus of this review is to summarize the outcomes research related to smokefree public policy interventions over the past 10 years, from 2000 through early 2010. The search was conducted using MEDLINE and the following search terms: smoking, smoking cessation, smoking/legislation and jurisprudence, smoking cessation/legislation and jurisprudence, and health policy. The paper is organized based on outcomes related to health (worker and population health), air quality, smoking prevalence and cessation, economics, and subpopulations.
Section snippets
Health Outcomes
There is a wealth of health outcomes research showing that hospitality workers are immediately protected when smokefree legislation takes effect. There also is an abundance of research demonstrating that smokefree legislation protects entire populations from AMIs, asthma, and other health conditions.
Air Quality Outcomes
There is an abundance of air quality monitoring research in the U.S. and worldwide, revealing that comprehensive smokefree legislation substantially improves air quality in indoor work environments, and the effects are immediate in reducing fine particle air pollution. A 32-country study of indoor air pollution revealed that countries with national smokefree indoor public places legislation had lower fine particle air pollution levels than those without restrictions.45 Another air quality study
Smoking Prevalence and Cessation Outcomes
While there is a wealth of cessation outcomes research related to smokefree legislation, there is less research on population-level smoking prevalence. The literature on smoking prevalence outcomes and smokefree laws is mixed.
Economic Outcomes
There is clear evidence that smokefree legislation does not hurt restaurant or bar businesses, and in some cases business may improve. There have been several published reviews of the economics of smokefree laws.98, 99 In the 1990s, there were multiple economic impact studies published, including an analysis of taxable sales receipts after New York City's 1995 Smoke-Free Air Act.100 More recently, Hyland and Tuk report an 18% increase in per capita employment after New York City's law.105 In
Subpopulations
Exposure to SHS varies by occupation type, gender, SES, race/ethnicity, and age,118 and smokefree legislation may have a differential impact on subpopulations such as low-SES groups.119 Ten years prior to the statewide Massachusetts smokefree law, there was a documented disparity in health protections, with populations that had low education levels less likely to live in a locale covered by smokefree restaurant regulations.120 One Swedish study revealed that gaming workers (i.e., bingo and
Conclusion
Research from 2000 to early 2010 provides evidence that smokefree legislation has a myriad of public health benefits and does not harm business. Despite decades of progress in protecting the public from SHS in workplaces and public places, vulnerable populations remain disproportionately affected by tobacco consumption, SHS exposure, and smoking-attributable disease and premature death. There is a need for research on the differential effects of smokefree legislation on subpopulations who may
References (136)
- et al.
Smokefree policies to reduce tobacco use a systematic review
Am J Prev Med
(2010) - et al.
Cardiovascular effect of bans on smoking in public places: a systematic review and meta-analysis
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2009) - et al.
Cardiovascular benefits of smoking regulations: the effect of decreased exposure to passive smoking
Prev Med
(2009) - et al.
The impact of a smoking ban on hospital admissions for coronary heart disease
Prev Med
(2007) - et al.
Asthma and the new anti-smoking legislationWhat has changed?
Rev Port Pneumol
(2009) The effectiveness of cigarette regulations in reducing cases of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome
J Health Econ
(2008)- et al.
Change in indoor particle levels after a smoking ban in Minnesota bars and restaurants
Am J Prev Med
(2010) - et al.
Tobacco control policies are egalitarian: a vulnerabilities perspective on clean indoor air laws, cigarette prices, and tobacco use disparities
Soc Sci Med
(2009) - et al.
Smoke-free laws and adult smoking prevalence
Prev Med
(2008) - et al.
Smoking in Italy 2005–2006: effects of a comprehensive National Tobacco Regulation
Prev Med
(2007)
Short-term effects of a comprehensive, statewide smokefree law on perceived opportunities to smoke
Am J Prev Med
Public policy and smoking cessation among young adults in the U.S.
Health Policy
Effects of new smoking regulations in Italy
Ann Oncology
The health consequences of involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke: a report of the Surgeon General
Changes in child exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (CHETS) study after implementation of smoke-free legislation in Scotland: national cross sectional survey
BMJ
Changes in exposure of adult non-smokers to secondhand smoke after implementation of smoke-free legislation in Scotland: national cross sectional survey
BMJ
Study of the impact of laws regulating tobacco consumption on the prevalence of passive smoking in Spain
Eur J Public Health
Legislation reduces exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke in New Zealand bars by about 90%
Tob Control
Smoke-free laws and secondhand smoke exposure in U.S. non-smoking adults, 1999–2002
Tob Control
Effects of restaurant and bar smoking regulations on exposure to environmental tobacco smoke among Massachusetts adults
Am J Public Health
Percent of U.S. state populations covered by 100% smokefree air laws 2010
Overview list—how many smokefree laws?
Decline in respiratory symptoms in service workers five months after a public smoking ban
Tob Control
Bar workers' health and environmental tobacco smoke exposure (BHETSE): symptomatic improvement in bar staff following smoke-free legislation in Scotland
Occup Environ Med
Changes in hospitality workers' exposure to secondhand smoke following the implementation of New York's smoke-free law
Tob Control
Secondhand smoke exposure and risk following the Irish smoking ban: an assessment of salivary cotinine concentrations in hotel workers and air nicotine levels in bars
Tob Control
Bar workers' exposure to second-hand smoke: the effect of Scottish smoke-free legislation on occupational exposure
Ann Occup Hygiene
Legislation for smoke-free workplaces and health of bar workers in Ireland: before and after study
BMJ
Effects of the Irish smoking ban on respiratory health of bar workers and air quality in Dublin pubs
Am J Resp Crit Care Med
Changes in air quality and second-hand smoke exposure in hospitality sector businesses after introduction of the English Smoke-free legislation
J Public Health (Oxf)
Exposure to fine and ultrafine particles from secondhand smoke in public places before and after the smoking ban, Italy 2005
Tob Control
Airborne exposure and biological monitoring of bar and restaurant workers before and after the introduction of a smoking ban
J Environ Monit
Impact of an indoor smoking ban on bar workers' exposure to secondhand smoke
J Occup Environ Med
Respiratory symptoms, pulmonary function, and markers of inflammation among bar workers before and after a legislative ban on smoking in public places
JAMA
Effects of a smoke-free law on hair nicotine and respiratory symptoms in restaurant and bar workers
J Occup Environ Med
Cross shift changes in lung function among bar and restaurant workers before and after implementation of a smoking ban
Occup Environ Med
Impact of the Spanish smoking law on exposure to second-hand smoke and respiratory health in hospitality workers: a cohort study
PLoS One
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
Secondhand smoke exposure and cardiovascular effects: making sense of the evidence
Declines in acute myocardial infarction after smoke-free laws and individual risk attributable to secondhand smoke
Circulation
Declines in acute myocardial infarction after smoke-free laws and individual risk attributable to secondhand smoke
Circulation
Reduced incidence of admissions for myocardial infarction associated with public smoking ban: before and after study
BMJ
Reduced admissions for acute myocardial infarction associated with a public smoking ban: matched controlled study
J Drug Educ
Declines in hospital admissions for acute myocardial infarction in New York State after implementation of a comprehensive smoking ban
Am J Public Health
Reduced hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction after implementation of a smoke-free ordinance—city of Pueblo, Colorado, 2002–2006
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep
Reduction incidence of myocardial infarction associated with a national legislative ban on smoking
Minerva Cardioangiol
Effect of the Italian smoking ban on population rates of acute coronary events
Circulation
Short-term effects of Italian smoking regulation on rates of hospital admission for acute myocardial infarction
European Heart J
Smoke-free legislation and hospitalizations for acute coronary syndrome
N Engl J Med
Reduction in asthma-related emergency department visits after implementation of a smoke-free law
J Allergy Clin Immunol
Cited by (115)
Municipal smoke-free laws and preterm birth
2022, American Journal of Obstetrics and GynecologySecondhand smoke exposure assessment in outdoor hospitality venues across 11 European countries
2021, Environmental ResearchPowering population health research: Considerations for plausible and actionable effect sizes
2021, SSM - Population HealthCitation Excerpt :For example, professional home visitors are more effective than paraprofessionals, although longer durations with less-trained implementers can achieve comparable impacts, and programs with longer durations generally produce larger effects (Bilukha et al., 2005). Comprehensive smoke-free air policies and policies targeting specific industries (e.g. restaurant workers) appear to be more effective than partial bans (Community Preventive Services Task Force, 2014b; Faber et al., 2017; Frazer et al., 2016; Hahn, 2010; Hoffman & Tan, 2015; Meyers et al., 2009; Tan & Glantz, 2012). The health impacts of CSLs vary widely by setting (e.g. country, historical and political context) (Hamad et al., 2018).