A importância da intervenção familiar na cessação tabágica: «Já pensou no seu filho?»

Recent marked increases in adolescent smoking indicate a need for new prevention approaches. Whether workplace and home smoking restrictions play a role in such prevention is unknown. To assess the association between workplace and home smoking restrictions and adolescent smoking. Data were analyzed from 2 large national population-based surveys, the Current Population Surveys of 1992-1993 and 1995-1996, which included 17,185 adolescents aged 15 to 17 years. Smoking status of the adolescents surveyed, compared by presence of home and workplace smoking restrictions. After adjusting for demographics and other smokers in the household, adolescents who lived in smoke-free households were 74% (95% confidence interval [CI], 62%-88%) as likely to be smokers as adolescents who lived in households with no smoking restrictions. Similarly, adolescents who worked in smoke-free workplaces were 68% (95% CI, 51%-90%) as likely to be smokers as adolescents who worked in a workplace with no smoking restrictions. Adolescent smokers were 1.80 (95% CI, 1.23-2.65) times more likely to be former smokers if they lived in smoke-free homes. The most marked relationship of home smoking restrictions to current adolescent smoking occurred in households where all other members were never-smokers. Current smoking prevalence among adolescents in homes without smoking restrictions approached that among adolescents in homes with a current smoker but with smoking restrictions. Parents with minor children should be encouraged to adopt smoke-free homes. Smoke-free workplaces can also augment smoking prevention. These findings emphasize the importance of tobacco control strategies aimed at the entire population rather than at youth alone. JAMA. 2000;284:717-722 Show more

This article outlines a theoretical framework for research concerning secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe) prevention as a means to curtail the tobacco industry. The Behavioral Ecological Model (BEM) assumes interlocking social contingencies of reinforcement (i.e., rewards or punishments) from the highest level of society (e.g., taxing cigarette sales) to physiological reactions to nicotine that influence smoking and SHSe. We review selected research concerning both policy and clinical efforts to restrict smoking and/or SHSe. Research to date has focused on smoking cessation with modest to weak effects. The BEM and empirical evidence suggest that cultural contingencies of reinforcement should be emphasized to protect people from SHSe, especially vulnerable children, pregnant women, the ill, the elderly, and low-income adults who have not "elected" to smoke. Doing so will protect vulnerable populations from industry-produced SHSe and may yield more and longer-lasting cessation. Interventions that reduce SHSe may serve as a Trojan horse to counter the tobacco industry. Future studies should: (a) guide policies to restrict SHSe; (b) develop powerful community and clinical interventions to reduce SHSe; (c) test the degree to which policies and other contexts enhance the effects of clinical interventions (e.g., media programs disclosing the disingenuous marketing by the industry); and (d) investigate the effects of all health care providers' ability to reduce SHSe and generate an antitobacco culture, by advising all clients to avoid starting to smoke, to protect their children from SHSe, and to quit smoking. Show more