IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0181035.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Smokefree legislation effects on respiratory and sensory disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Yolanda Rando-Matos
  • Mariona Pons-Vigués
  • María José López
  • Rodrigo Córdoba
  • José Luis Ballve-Moreno
  • Elisa Puigdomènech-Puig
  • Vega Estíbaliz Benito-López
  • Olga Lucía Arias-Agudelo
  • Mercè López-Grau
  • Anna Guardia-Riera
  • José Manuel Trujillo
  • Carlos Martin-Cantera

Abstract

Aims: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to synthesize the available evidence in scientific papers of smokefree legislation effects on respiratory diseases and sensory and respiratory symptoms (cough, phlegm, red eyes, runny nose) among all populations. Materials and methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out. A search between January 1995 and February 2015 was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. Inclusion criteria were: 1) original scientific studies about smokefree legislation, 2) Data before and after legislation were collected, and 3) Impact on respiratory and sensory outcomes were assessed. Paired reviewers independently carried out the screening of titles and abstracts, data extraction from full-text articles, and methodological quality assessment. Results: A total number of 1606 papers were identified. 50 papers were selected, 26 were related to symptoms (23 concerned workers). Most outcomes presented significant decreases in the percentage of people suffering from them, especially in locations with comprehensive measures and during the immediate post-ban period (within the first six months). Four (50%) of the papers concerning pulmonary function reported some significant improvement in expiratory parameters. Significant decreases were described in 13 of the 17 papers evaluating asthma hospital admissions, and there were fewer significant reductions in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease admissions (range 1–36%) than for asthma (5–31%). Six studies regarding different respiratory diseases showed discrepant results, and four papers about mortality reported significant declines in subgroups. Low bias risk was present in 23 (46%) of the studies. Conclusions: Smokefree legislation appears to improve respiratory and sensory symptoms at short term in workers (the overall effect being greater in comprehensive smokefree legislation in sensory symptoms) and, to a lesser degree, rates of hospitalization for asthma.

Suggested Citation

  • Yolanda Rando-Matos & Mariona Pons-Vigués & María José López & Rodrigo Córdoba & José Luis Ballve-Moreno & Elisa Puigdomènech-Puig & Vega Estíbaliz Benito-López & Olga Lucía Arias-Agudelo & Mercè Lópe, 2017. "Smokefree legislation effects on respiratory and sensory disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-42, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0181035
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181035
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0181035
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0181035&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0181035?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0181035. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.