1. Smoke-free Workplace Policies Presented By: Nicole Boyle & Naomi Harding

3. Driving Factors:

4. There are many harmful health effects associated with second hand smoke.

5. They felt it would influence smokers to quit.

7. Smoking has been linked to many forms of cancer

8. Bladder

9. Esophagus

10. Larynx

11. Lungs

12. Mouth

14. Background There are 27 smoke-free states in the U.S. They prohibit smoking in public places. Restaurants Bars Workplaces (offices, schools) Pennsylvania is currently not a smoke-free state.

15. Background Preliminary research suggests that adopting smoke-free policies is beneficial. Improves the likelihood smokers will quit or reduce the amount they smoke per day. Improve indoor air quality. Provide overall health benefits for all members of an organization.

16. Background Within the last 10 years the availability of smoking cessation hotlines, support groups, and quitting aids has greatly increased. Research suggests these programs will increase the likelihood a smoker will attempt to quit and be more successful in doing so.

17. Predictions Smokers will be less likely than Non-smokers to support a smoke-free workplace policy Job Stress level will have an impact on the number of smoke breaks taken per day Smokers who have used support systems were more successful than those who did not Non-Smokers believe smokers take more breaks than Smokers do Smokers tend to be older in age on average

18. Data Collection Target Audience Smoking and Non-Smoking Adults Sampling plan Survey adults age 18 and over (legal smoking age) Various occupations and work environments Summary of respondents Passed out 65 paper surveys, 63 people responded

19. Raw Data

20. Demographics 63 people were surveyed 32 men 31 women 35 smokers 28 non-smokers Ages ranged from 18-68

21. Demographics Surveyed nearly equal amounts of males and femaled

22. Demographics

23. Demographics

24. Demographics The majority of non-smokers appear to be in the lower age categories >36yrs or more Smokers show a more equal distribution

25. Hypothesis 1 Smokers are older, on average, than the mean age of those surveyed

26. Hypothesis 1 Results We can reject the null that smokers are not older |t-obs |>critical measure P-value <<<<α level of 0.05

27. Hypothesis 2 Smokers are less likely than non-smokers to support a smoke-free workplace policy

28. Hypothesis 2 Results We cannot reject the null that there is no difference in the proportion of smokers and non-smokers supporting smoke-free workplace policies |t-obs |< critical measure P-value 0.082 >α level of 0.05

29. Hypothesis 3 Smokers using outside support to quit will be more successful than those not using support

30. Hypothesis 3 Results Cannot reject the null hypothesis that smokers using support are more successful |t-obs |< critical measure P-value 0.457 >α level of 0.05

31. Use of Support Systems Of our 35 surveyed smokers, 68% (17/35) used some sort of outside support (patch, prescriptions, support group) to help them quit Out of those individuals that used support to quit, only 26% saw success lasting longer than one year!

32. Hypothesis 3 Results Cont.

33. Hypothesis 4 Age, number of packs per week and number of breaks taken per day have an influence on job stress level. Null b1=b2=b3=0

34. Hypothesis 4 Results Model is not significant. In all cases |t-obs |< critical measure P-value >α level of 0.05 Had to throw out entire hypothesis

35. Hypothesis 5 Non-smokers believe smokers take more breaks

36. Hypothesis 5 Results We can reject the null that non-smokers think smokers take the same number of breaks |t-obs |>critical measure P-value <<<<α level of 0.05

37. Recommendations Survey larger population Have less categories Collect more numerical data or data that can be more easily translated Collect data from places that are already smoke-free to serve as a reference

39. DO IT FOR YOUR COUNTRY!!!