{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03728638011393061, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00983946141895391, 'mean_word_length': 5.355263157894737, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Smoke-Free or Not: Attitudes Toward Indoor Smoke-Free Policies Among Permanent Supportive Housing Residents

Purpose: Interventions for tobacco dependence are most effective when combined with smoke-free policies, yet such policies are rare in permanent supportive housing (PSH) for formerly homeless adults. We aimed to provide in-depth analysis of attitudes and barriers to and facilitators of implementing smoke-free policies in PSH. Approach: Current smokers living in PSH completed a questionnaire and participated in in-depth, semistructured interviews on smoking history, attitudes toward smoke-free policies, and perceived barriers to cessation. Setting: We collaborated with 6 San Francisco Bay Area PSH agencies. Participants: Thirty-six residents in PSH. Methods: Interviews, conducted by trained interviewers, were digitally recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using content analysis methods. Participants were recruited until we reached thematic saturation, or no new themes emerged from the interviews. Results: Over half of participants (52.8%, n = 19) reported depression, and 97.2% (n = 35) reported current substance use. Support for indoor smoking bans in living areas was modest (33.1%), although most residents anticipated cutting down (61%) and reported they would not move because of a smoking ban (77.8%). There was interest in quitting smoking, although co-use of tobacco with other substances was a major barrier. Conclusion: This study is the first to explore attitudes toward smoke-free policies in PSH. We found that residents in PSH support smoke-free policies and consider them feasible if implementation processes are sound. Our findings underscore the need to address barriers to adopting smoke-free policies and accessing smoking cessation services. In particular, interventions must address the co-use of tobacco with other substances and the impact of smoking on financial and housing stability.