Smoke-Free Homes

KEY QUESTIONS

How can expanding smoking treatment services to include the practice of smoke free homes yield higher rates of smoking cessation among low-income populations?

Will changing the standard of practice for population-level treatment of smoking result in increased cessation in low-income populations?

REACH

Utilizing the United Way 2-1-1  of Delaware, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Missouri, North Carolina, Nebraska, South Carolina and Wisconsin connects us with low income individuals seeking assistance with basic needs such as food, utilities, and rent. In the United States, cigarette smoking has a higher prevalence among populations of lower socio-economic standing whose  issues like stress and limited assistance act as barriers to quitting. After the referral of basic needs resources, we assess the interest level of this population in smoking cessation services. Through a partnership with 2-1-1 and Optum, this study hopes to deliver the cessation and Smoke Free Homes interventions to low-income, daily smokers with no home smoking ban.

In this study, we hope to understand the impact of changing the standard practice for population-level treatment of smoking to include creating a smoke free homes in smoking cessation services. Low-income individuals are systematically excluded from current cessation-focused services that limit counseling to individuals planning to quit in the next thirty days. Using a more inclusive and multifaceted approach, we can engage with this population through expanded services that include a quit line as well Smoke Free Home interventions to increase smoking cessation in low income populations.

EFFECTIVENESS

The current approach of smoking treatment services excludes the overwhelming majority of low-income smokers if they do not plan to quit in 30 days. Since these individuals may not meet this criterion, utilizing a mechanism that engages this population while being cognizant of social and economic barriers that exist is necessary. This study explores the effectiveness of the current standard practice of a quitline compared to expanded services of a quitline and the Smoke Free Homes intervention of banning smoking in the home. Analysis of cessation rates for each group occurs through 3- and 6-month follow-ups.

CONNECTIONS

The study partners with United Way 2-1-1, a social services organization with  the capacity to reach an extensive number of low-income individuals through their referral of resources to help people with basic needs and Optum, a quitline provider that offers the leading tobacco cessation program, using physical, psychological and behavioral strategies to help smokers quit.