Document Type : Original Article
Authors
- . Seyed Saeed Mazloomy Mahmoodabad,
- . Zohreh Karimiankakolaki
- . Ashraf Kazemi 1
- . Hossein Fallahzadeh 2
1 Department of Reproductive Health, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
2 Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: The inability of women to demand from their husbands, for not smoking,
has been reported as a factor in exposure to cigarette smoke. This study aimed to investigate the
perceived barriers and self‑efficacy of pregnant women regarding second‑hand smoke (SHS) at home.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a cross‑sectional study, and the sample size was 255
pregnant women who visited the health‑care centers in Isfahan, Iran, from July 2018 to September
2018, and were selected randomly and voluntarily. A questionnaire was designed to collect the
data about the exposure to smoke, perceived barriers, and self‑efficacy. The data were analyzed
using descriptive statistics (mean score and standard deviation), inferential statistics (nonparametric
Mann–Whitney and Kendall test), and Spearman’s correlation and regression.
RESULTS: The mean score of self‑efficacy in the exposure group was lower than that the other
group (P = 0.000). The mean score of perceived barrier was not a significant difference (P = 0.449).
Personal perceived barriers are the most important predictor of self‑efficacy of pregnant women
in exposure to SHS (95% confidence interval: 0.013–0.262) (P = 0.030). Kendall test comparing
items within the group and Mann–Whitney test comparing the two groups showed that personal
factors such as “Unaware of the dangers of SHS and protective measures” for notexposed women
and environmental factor “the lack of ban smoking law at home” for exposed women are considered
the most important barriers (P = 0.000). “Not being together a husband” (P = 0.293) and “going to
another place when smoking a husband” (P = 0.000) are the highest self‑efficacy items.
CONCLUSIONS: It is necessary to develop training programs to increase self‑efficacy to avoid
exposure to SHS and for both pregnant women and their husbands. It is also necessary to educate
and inform about SHS and protective measures against it and to set up “smoking ban law” at home
in our country to protect pregnant women.
Keywords
Worldwide burden of disease from exposure to second‑hand
smoke: A retrospective analysis of data from 192 countries. Lancet
2011;377:139‑46.
2. Zhang L, Hsia J, Tu X, Xia Y, Zhang L, Bi Z, et al. Peer reviewed:
Exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke and interventions among
pregnant women in China: A systematic review. Prev Chronic Dis
2015;12:1‑11.
3. Baheiraei A, Faghihi RS, Mirmohammad AM, Kazem NA.
Predictors of home smoking ban in households in pregnant
women. Payesh 2012;11:511‑7.
4. Amasha HA, Jaradeh MS. Effect of active and passive
smoking during pregnancy on its outcomes. Health Science
Journal2014;6:335‑52.
5. Alghamdi AS, Jokhadar HF, Alghamdi IM, Abdullah S,
Alsohibani OJ, Wahabi HA. Socioeconomic determinants of
exposure to secondhand smoke among pregnant women. Int J
Womens Health Reprod Sci 2016;4:59‑63.
6. Alemán A, Morello P, Colomar M, Llambi L, Berrueta M,
Gibbons L, et al. Brief counseling on secondhand smoke exposure
in pregnant women in Argentina and Uruguay. Int J Environ Res
Public Health 2016;14. pii: E28.
7. Mojibyan M, Karimi M, Bidaki R, Rafiee P, Zare A. Exposure to
second‑hand smoke during pregnancy and preterm delivery. Int
J High Risk Behav Addict 2013;1:149‑53.
8. ChiYC, Sha F, Yip PS, Chen JL, ChenYY. Randomized comparison
of group versus individual educational interventions for
pregnant women to reduce their secondhand smoke exposure.
Medicine (Baltimore) 2016;95:e5072.
9. Goel P, Radotra A, Singh I, Aggarwal A, Dua D. Effects of passive
smoking on outcome in pregnancy. J Postgrad Med 2004;50:12‑6.
10. Nichter M, Padmajam S, Nichter M, Sairu P, Aswathy S, Mini GK,
et al. Developing a smoke free homes initiative in Kerala, India.
BMC Public Health 2015;15:480.
11. Zheng P, Berg CJ, Kegler MC, Fu W, Wang J, Zhou X, et al.
Smoke‑free homes and home exposure to secondhand smoke in
Shanghai, China. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2014;11:12015‑28.
12. Hu JS, Zhou Q, Zhu J, Wang J. Evaluation on interventions for
reducing secondhand smoking exposure of pregnant women.
Pract Prev Med 2011;18:2226‑8.
13. Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K. Health Behavior and Health
Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. 4th editionJohn Wiley
& Sons; 2008.
14. Mao A. Getting over the patriarchal barriers: Women’s
management of men’s smoking in Chinese families. Health Educ
Res 2015;30:13‑23.
15. Ma SJ, Wang JF, Mei CZ, Xu XF, Yang GH. Passive smoking in
China: Contributing factors and areas for future interventions. Biomed Environ Sci 2007;20:420‑5.
16. Lee AH. A pilot intervention for pregnant women in Sichuan,
China on passive smoking. Patient Educ Couns 2008;71:396‑401.
17. Passey ME, Longman JM, Robinson J, Wiggers J, Jones LL.
Smoke‑free homes: What are the barriers, motivators and
enablers? A qualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis.
BMJ Open 2016;6:e010260.
18. Yang L, Tong EK, Mao Z, Hu TW. Exposure to secondhand smoke
and associated factors among non‑smoking pregnant women
with smoking husbands in Sichuan province, China. Acta Obstet
Gynecol Scand 2010;89:549‑57.
19. Sahebi Z, Kazemi A, Loripoor Parizi M. The relationship between
husbands’ health belief and environment tobacco smoke exposure
among their pregnant wife. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med
2017;30:830‑3.
20. Wakefield M, Reid Y, Roberts L, Mullins R, Gillies P. Smoking
and smoking cessation among men whose partners are pregnant:
A qualitative study. Soc Sci Med 1998;47:657‑64.
21. Kazemi A, Ehsanpour S, Nekoei‑Zahraei NS. A randomized
trial to promote health belief and to reduce environmental
tobacco smoke exposure in pregnant women. Health Educ Res
2012;27:151‑9.
22. Aurrekoetxea JJ, Murcia M, Rebagliato M, Fernández‑Somoano A,
Castilla AM, Guxens M, et al. Factors associated with second‑hand
smoke exposure in non‑smoking pregnant women in Spain:
Self‑reported exposure and urinary cotinine levels. Sci Total
Environ 2014;470‑471:1189‑96.
23. Been JV, Mackay DF, Millett C, Pell JP, van Schayck OC, Sheikh A.
Impact of smoke‑free legislation on perinatal and infant mortality:
A national quasi‑experimental study. Sci Rep 2015;5:13020.
24. Ward C, Lewis S, Coleman T. Prevalence of maternal smoking and
environmental tobacco smoke exposure during pregnancy and
impact on birth weight: Retrospective study using millennium
cohort. BMC Public Health 2007;7:81.
25. Mao A, Bristow K, Robinson J. Caught in a dilemma: Why do
non‑smoking women in China support the smoking behaviors
of men in their families? Health Educ Res 2013;28:153‑64.
26. Loke AY, Lam TH, Pan SC, Li SY, Gao XJ, Song YY. Exposure to
and actions against passive smoking in non‑smoking pregnant
women in Guangzhou, China. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand
2000;79:947‑52.
)