RESEARCH PAPER
Social measures for reducing exposure to secondhand
smoke in migrant workers of sugarcane harvest in the lower
northern region of Thailand
More details
Hide details
1
Faculty of Public Health,
Naresuan University,
Phitsanulok, Thailand
2
School of Medicine,
University of Phayao, Phayao,
Thailand
3
Ministry of Health and
Family Welfare Coordination
Centre, Cox’s Bazar,
Bangladesh
Submission date: 2021-01-16
Final revision date: 2021-06-01
Acceptance date: 2021-07-11
Publication date: 2021-09-24
Corresponding author
Narongsak Noosorn
Faculty
of Public Health, Naresuan
University, Phitsanulok 65000,
Thailand
Tob. Induc. Dis. 2021;19(September):73
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
The sugarcane harvest migrant workers are an underprivileged
group in Thailand and have a high risk of exposure to secondhand smoke but
are potentially neglected in health promotion interventions.
Methods:
This three-phase study applied a mixed-method research approach.
The data were collected from February to December 2019 from the Sukhothai
province of Thailand. In Phase 1, the level of secondhand smoke exposure of
the sugarcane harvest migrant workers at the worker camp was explored. The
data were collected from 462 workers by questionnaires and from 24 sample
participants in the group discussions about the factors leading to the exposure
to secondhand smoke. Phase 2 was the provision and implementation of social
measures for the health protection of migrant workers and families from exposure
to secondhand smoke. In Phase 3, an evaluation of the health protection model for
the migrant workers and families from secondhand smoke exposure was explored.
Results:
Workers aged ≤40 years had 1.9 times higher exposure to secondhand
smoke than workers aged ≥41 years (OR=1.93; 95% CI: 1.24–3.01). Those who
worked overtime had 1.7 times higher exposure to secondhand smoke than those
who did not work overtime (OR=1.71; 95% CI: 1.10–2.66). Social measures to
prevent secondhand smoke were: given a warning, no rewards for cigarettes,
designated smoking area, not asking the children to buy cigarettes, stop displaying
cigarettes at grocery shops, and empowering woman to go against the smoking
husband in the camp and the sugarcane field when the women, children, and nonsmokers
are present. After implementing the measures, there was no exposure to
secondhand smoke inside the room, cooking area, and at the quad in the camp
center.
Conclusions:
Appropriate social measures for health protection can help to reduce
exposure to secondhand smoke.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to acknowledge the Tobacco Control Research of
Thailand foundation for the funding of the research.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The authors have each completed and submitted an ICMJE form for
disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. The authors declare that
they have no competing interests, financial or otherwise, related to
the current work. All authors report support from the Tobacco Control
Research of Thailand foundation.
FUNDING
This study was funded by Tobacco Control Research of Thailand
foundation.
ETHICAL APPROVAL AND INFORMED CONSENT
Ethical approval was given by the Naresuan University Research Ethics
Committee (No. 5202030002, 20 November 2018). Participation in the discussions was taken
as informed consent.
DATA AVAILABILITY
The data supporting this research are available from the authors on
reasonable request.
PROVENANCE AND PEER REVIEW
Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
REFERENCES (21)
5.
European Commission. Tobacco or Health in the European Union: Past, Present and Future. European Communities; 2004. Accessed January 16, 2021.
http://ec.europa.eu/health/arc...
8.
Ham DC, Przybeck T, Strickland JR, Luke DA, Bierut LJ, Evanoff BA. Occupation and workplace policies predict smoking behaviors: analysis of national data from the current population survey. J Occup Environ Med. 2011;53(11):1337-1345. doi:10.1097/JOM.0b013e3182337778
9.
Olivieri M, Murgia N, Carsin AE, et al. Effects of smoking bans on passive smoking exposure at work and at home. The European Community respiratory health survey. Indoor Air. 2019;29(4):670-679. doi:10.1111/ina.12556
10.
van den Brand FA, Nagelhout GE, Winkens B, Chavannes NH, van Schayck OCP, Evers SMAA. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis of a work-place smoking cessation intervention with and without financial incentives. Addiction. 2020;115(3):534-545. doi:10.1111/add.14861
12.
Manoton A, Juwa S, Wongwat R. Tobacco consumption and secondhand smoking in temporary migrant workers in the context of Thailand's tobacco control policy: migrant workers temporarily cut sugar cane Sukhothai Province. 2010.
14.
Erlingsson C, Brysiewicz P. A hands-on guide to doing content analysis. Afr J Emerg Med. 2017;7(3):93-99. doi:10.1016/j.afjem.2017.08.001
15.
Liebling BA, Seiler M, Shaver P. Self-awareness and cigarette-smoking behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1974;10(4):325-332. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(74)90029-8
16.
Robin RC, Noosorn N, Alif SM. Secondhand Smoking Among Children in Rural Households: A Community Based Cross-Sectional Study in Bangladesh. Osong Public Health Res Perspect. 2020;11(4):201-208. doi:10.24171/j.phrp.2020.11.4.09
17.
Glenn NM, Lapalme J, McCready G, Frohlich KL. Young adults' experiences of neighbourhood smoking-related norms and practices: A qualitative study exploring place-based social inequalities in smoking. Soc Sci Med. 2017;189:17-24. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.07.021
18.
Jackson C, Huque R, Satyanarayana V, et al. "He Doesn't Listen to My Words at All, So I Don't Tell Him Anything"-A Qualitative Investigation on Exposure to Second Hand Smoke among Pregnant Women, Their Husbands and Family Members from Rural Bangladesh and Urban India. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016;13(11):1098. doi:10.3390/ijerph13111098
19.
McKeganey N, Barnard M, Russell C. Visible Vaping: E-Cigarettes and the Further De-Normalization of Smoking. International Archives of Addiction Research and Medicine. 2016;2(2). doi:10.23937/2474-3631/1510023
20.
Bien TH, Burge R. Smoking and drinking: a review of the literature. Int J Addict. 1990;25(12):1429-1454. doi:10.3109/10826089009056229
21.
Kouvonen A, Kivimäki M, Virtanen M, Pentti J, Vahtera J. Work stress, smoking status, and smoking intensity: an observational study of 46,190 employees. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2005;59(1):63-69. doi:10.1136/jech.2004.019752