Preventing Chronic Disease | National and State Cost Savings Associated With Prohibiting Smoking in Subsidized and Public Housing in the United States - CDC

FULL-TEXT ►

Preventing Chronic Disease | National and State Cost Savings Associated With Prohibiting Smoking in Subsidized and Public Housing in the United States - CDC

National and State Cost Savings Associated With Prohibiting Smoking in Subsidized and Public Housing in the United States

Navigate This Article

• Abstract
• Introduction
• Methods
• Results
• Discussion
• Acknowledgments
• Author Information
• References
• Tables

Brian A. King, PhD, MPH; Richard M. Peck, PhD; Stephen D. Babb, MPH

Suggested citation for this article: King BA, Peck RM, Babb SD. National and State Cost Savings Associated With Prohibiting Smoking in Subsidized and Public Housing in the United States. Prev Chronic Dis 2014;11:140222. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd11.140222.

PEER REVIEWED

Abstract

Introduction
Despite progress in implementing smoke-free laws in indoor public places and workplaces, millions of Americans remain exposed to secondhand smoke at home. The nation’s 80 million multiunit housing residents, including the nearly 7 million who live in subsidized or public housing, are especially susceptible to secondhand smoke infiltration between units.

Methods
We calculated national and state costs that could have been averted in 2012 if smoking were prohibited in all US subsidized housing, including public housing: 1) secondhand smoke-related direct health care, 2) renovation of smoking-permitted units; and 3) smoking-attributable fires. Annual cost savings were calculated by using residency estimates from the Department of Housing and Urban Development and cost data reported elsewhere. Data were adjusted for inflation and variations in state costs. National and state estimates (excluding Alaska and the District of Columbia) were calculated by cost type.

Results
Prohibiting smoking in subsidized housing would yield annual cost savings of $496.82 million (range, $258.96–$843.50 million), including $310.48 million ($154.14–$552.34 million) in secondhand smoke-related health care, $133.77 million ($75.24–$209.01 million) in renovation expenses, and $52.57 million ($29.57–$82.15 million) in smoking-attributable fire losses. By state, cost savings ranged from $0.58 million ($0.31–$0.94 million) in Wyoming to $124.68 million ($63.45–$216.71 million) in New York. Prohibiting smoking in public housing alone would yield cost savings of $152.91 million ($79.81–$259.28 million); by state, total cost savings ranged from $0.13 million ($0.07–$0.22 million) in Wyoming to $57.77 million ($29.41–$100.36 million) in New York.

Conclusion
Prohibiting smoking in all US subsidized housing, including public housing, would protect health and could generate substantial societal cost savings.

Figure. Example of calculations used to estimate cost savings associated with prohibiting smoking in subsidized housing, New York State. [A text description of this figure is also available.]

Acknowledgments

The findings and conclusions in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. We received no funding, direct or indirect, for the reported research.

Top of Page

Author Information

Corresponding Author: Brian A. King, PhD, MPH, Office on Smoking and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, MS F-79, Atlanta, GA 30341. Telephone: 770-488-5107. E-mail: baking@cdc.gov.

Author Affiliations: Richard M. Peck, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois; Stephen D. Babb, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.

Top of Page

References

1. US Department of Health and Human Services. The health consequences of involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke: a report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health; 2006.
2. US Department of Health and Human Services. The health consequences of smoking — 50 years of progress: a report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health; 2014.
3. State Tobacco Activities Tracking and Evaluation (STATE) System. Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Centers for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health; 2014. http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/statesystem/Default/Default.aspx. Accessed February 12, 2014.
4. International Agency for Research on Cancer. Evaluating the effectiveness of smoke-free policies. Lyon (FR): International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2009.
5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Vital signs: nonsmokers’ exposure to secondhand smoke — United States, 1999–2008. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2010;59(35):1141–6. PubMed
6. Bohac DL, Hewett MJ, Hammond SK, Grimsrud DT. Secondhand smoke transfer and reductions by air sealing and ventilation in multiunit buildings: PFT and nicotine verification. Indoor Air 2011;21(1):36–44. CrossRef PubMed
7. King BA, Travers MJ, Cummings KM, Mahoney MC, Hyland AJ. Secondhand smoke transfer in multiunit housing. Nicotine Tob Res 2010;12(11):1133–41.CrossRef PubMed
8. King BA, Babb SD, Tynan MA, Gerzoff RB. National and state estimates of secondhand smoke infiltration among US multiunit housing residents. Nicotine Tob Res 2013;15(7):1316–21. CrossRef PubMed
9. Resident Characteristic Report System. Washington (DC): US Department of Housing and Urban Development; 2014. https://pic.hud.gov/pic/RCRPublic/rcrmain.asp. Accessed February 12, 2014.
10. King BA, Peck RM, Babb SD. Cost savings associated with prohibiting smoking in US subsidized housing. Am J Prev Med 2013;44(6):631–4. CrossRefPubMed
11. Ong MK, Diamant AL, Zhou Q, Park HY, Kaplan RM. Estimates of smoking-related property costs in California multiunit housing. Am J Public Health 2012;102(3):490–3. CrossRef PubMed
12. Waters HR, Foldes SS, Alesci NL, Samet J. The economic impact of exposure to secondhand smoke in Minnesota. Am J Public Health 2009;99(4):754–9.CrossRef PubMed
13. Consumer price index inflation calculator. Washington (DC): US Department of Labor; 2014. http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm. Accessed February 16, 2014.
14. Klepeis NE, Nelson WC, Ott WR, Robinson JP, Tsang AM, Switzer P, et al. The National Human Activity Pattern Survey (NHAPS): a resource for assessing exposure to environmental pollutants. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol 2001;11(3):231–52. CrossRef PubMed
15. National Institutes of Health. 2010–2011 Tobacco use supplement to the current population survey. Washington (DC): National Cancer Institute; 2013. http://appliedresearch.cancer.gov/studies/tus-cps/. Accessed February 16, 2014.
16. US Department of Health and Human Services. National health expenditure data. Washington (DC): Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; 2011. http://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/index.html?redirect=/nationalhealthexpenddata/. Accessed July 16, 2014.
17. Kaiser Family Foundation. Medicaid enrollment as a percent of total population, FY2010. Menlo Park (CA): The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation; 2014. http://kff.org/medicaid/state-indicator/medicaid-enrollment-as-a-of-pop/. Accessed July 16, 2014.
18. Allowing smoking in your building is expensive and dangerous. Portland (ME): Smoke-Free Housing Coalition of Maine. http://www.breatheeasymaine.org/sites/default/files/content/Landlord%20Fact%20Sheet_0.pdf. Accessed February 16, 2014.
19. The total cost of fire in the United States—2013. Quincy (MA): National Fire Protection Association. http://www.nfpa.org/research/reports-and-statistics. Accessed February 16, 2014.
20. Home structure fires—2013. Quincy (MA): National Fire Protection Association. http://www.nfpa.org/~/media/Files/Research/NFPA%20reports/Occupancies/oshomes.pdf. Accessed February 16, 2014.
21. Cramer ME, Roberts S, Stevens E. Landlord attitudes and behaviors regarding smoke-free policies: implications for policy change. Public Health Nurs 2011;28(1):3–12. CrossRef PubMed
22. Licht AS, King BA, Travers MJ, Rivard C, Hyland AJ. Attitudes, experiences, and acceptance of smoke-free policies among US multiunit housing residents. Am J Public Health 2012;102(10):1868–71. CrossRef PubMed
23. Drach LL, Pizacani BA, Rohde KL, Schubert S. The acceptability of comprehensive smoke-free policies to low-income tenants in subsidized housing. Prev Chronic Dis 2010;7(3):A66. PubMed
24. Non-smoking policies in public housing. Washington (DC): US Department of Housing and Urban Development; 2012. http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=12-25pihn.pdf. Accessed February 21, 2014.
25. Optional smoke-free housing policy information. Washington (DC): US Department of Housing and Urban Development; 2010. http://www.tcsg.org/sfelp/HUD-SFHsgImplemt091510.pdf. Accessed February 21, 2014.
26. US local laws and policies restricting or prohibiting smoking in private units of multi-unit housing. Berkeley (CA): Americans for Nonsmokers Rights Foundation; 2014. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/smokefreemuh.pdf. Accessed February 21, 2014.
27. King BA, Cummings KM, Mahoney MC, Hyland AJ. Intervention to promote smoke-free policies among multiunit housing operators. J Public Health Manag Pract 2011;17(3):E1–8. CrossRef PubMed
28. Wilson KM, Klein JD, Blumkin AK, Gottlieb M, Winickoff JP. Tobacco-smoke exposure in children who live in multiunit housing. Pediatrics 2011;127(1):85–92. CrossRef PubMed
29. Pizacani BA, Maher JE, Rohde K, Drach L, Stark MJ. Implementation of a smoke-free policy in subsidized multiunit housing: effects on smoking cessation and secondhand smoke exposure. Nicotine Tob Res 2012;14(9):1027–34. CrossRef PubMed
30. Farrelly MC, Nonnemaker JM, Watson KA. The consequences of high cigarette excise taxes for low-income smokers. PLoS ONE 2012;7(9):e43838.CrossRef PubMed