Radon, Secondhand Smoke, and Children in the Home: Creating a Teachable Moment for Lung Cancer Prevention

Huntington‐Moskos, Luz; Rayens, Mary Kay; Wiggins, Amanda; Hahn, Ellen J.

doi:10.1111/phn.12283

Cited by 13 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…and external persuasion like Bsocial influence^(how many people do you know who have tested their homes for radon?). Although the last three variables were measured in previous research in different settings (Butler et al 2017;Huntington-Moskos et al 2016), our pilot qualitative study conducted in winter 2017 helped to shape the questionnaire in a Canadian context. We employed an anchored relative scale rather than Likert scales as previous research has identified the former as being more sensitive than the latter (Hampson et al 2003).…”

Section: Instrument and Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radon, an invisible killer in Canadian homes: perceptions of Ottawa-Gatineau residents

Khan

Krewski

Gomes

et al. 2018

Can J Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Canadians have reason to care about indoor air quality as they spend over 90% of the time indoors. Although indoor radon causes more deaths than any other environmental hazard, only 55% of Canadians have heard of it, and of these, 6% have taken action. The gap between residents' risk awareness and adoption of actual protective behaviour presents a challenge to public health practitioners. Residents' perception of the risk should inform health communication that targets motivation for action. In Canada, research about the public perception of radon health risk is lacking. The aim of this study was to describe residents' perceptions of radon health risks and, applying a theoretical lens, evaluate how perceptions correlate with protection behaviours. Methods We conducted a mixed online and face-to-face survey (N = 557) with both homeowners and tenants in Ottawa-Gatineau census metropolitan area. Descriptive, correlation, and regression analyses addressed the research questions. Results Compared to the gravity of the risk, public perception remained low. While 32% of residents expressed some concern about radon health risk, 12% of them tested and only 3% mitigated their homes for radon. Residents' perceptions of the probability and severity of the risk, social influence, care for children, and smoking in home correlated significantly with their intention to test; these factors also predicted their behaviours for testing and mitigation. Conclusion Health risk communication programs need to consider the affective aspects of risk perception in addition to rational cognition to improve protection behaviours. A qualitative study can explore the reasons behind the gap between testing and mitigation. Résumé Objectifs Les Canadiens ont de bonnes raisons de se préoccuper de la qualité de l'air intérieur, car ils passent plus de 90 % de leur temps à l'intérieur. Bien que le radon domiciliaire (RD) cause plus de décès que tout autre risques environnementaux, seulement 55 % des Canadiens en ont déjà entendu parler, et d'entre eux seulement 6 % ont pris des mesures concrètes pour l'éradiquer. L'écart entre la sensibilisation aux risques et la prise de mesures de protection réelles par les résidents constitue un défi pour les professionnels de la santé publique. La perception des résidents face aux risques associés au RD devrait guider la communication en matière de santé pour cibler la motivation. Au Canada, très peu d'études portant sur les perceptions de la population face aux risques associés au RD ont été réalisées. Le but de cette étude est de décrire les perceptions qu'entretiennent

show abstract

Section: Instrument and Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radon, an invisible killer in Canadian homes: perceptions of Ottawa-Gatineau residents

Khan

Krewski

Gomes

et al. 2018

Can J Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nurse authors promoted the idea of nursing EJ strategies that engage local, state, and federal government officials to advocate for policy-level solutions (Amiri & Zhao, 2019b;Hackley et al, 2007;Huntington-Moskos et al, 2016;Nicholas & Breakey, 2017;Travers et al, 2019), and suggest partnership with other health and policy professionals (Amiri & Zhao, 2019b;Castner et al, 2019). Valentine-Maher et al (2018) specifically suggest advocacy for the reduction in income inequality and policy to address the disproportionate risk of chemical exposures in poor and underserved communities.…”

Section: Suggested Advocacy Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To build EJ capacity of public health departments,Butterfield et al (2009) recommended that focusing on actions aimed at mitigating risks to multiple agents could help health departments to "de-silo" agent-based programs (e.g., lead) and incorporate broad-based risk reduction into multiple programs. Nursing practice could also focus on educating low-income families about indoor air pollutants and connect them with resources(Huntington-Moskos et al, 2016), and implement frequent monitoring of children with multiple risk factors including exposure to racism, poverty, and traffic emissions(Newcomb & Li, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Nursing strategies for environmental justice: A scoping review

LeClair

Watts

Zahner

2020

Public Health Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To describe types of strategic actions nurses take to promote environmental justice (EJ) through research, education, advocacy, and practice (REAP) reported in peer-reviewed literature. Design and Sample:A scoping review of literature was conducted that described EJ nursing strategies and included nurses listed as authors, subjects, partners, or organizational members. The sample consisted of 35 articles, representing 24 primary research studies and 11 nonresearch articles. Data were separately analyzed by research and nonresearch articles for a clearer understanding of evidence-based strategies within domains of REAP. Results: Articles in the sample highlighted the importance of authentic community partnership and represented diversity of nursing strategies that addressed a range of environmental exposures and subsequent health and racial inequities. Climate justice, a concept that emerged from the EJ movement and intersects with planetary health, is a recent focus in professional nursing. Conclusions: This scoping review establishes an understanding of the extent of nursing knowledge and research in EJ and lays the groundwork for further research on effective EJ nursing strategies. Community-Based Participatory Research/ Participatory Action Research methods are fundamental for EJ research, and further theoretical development is needed to guide evaluation of EJ nursing strategies for education, advocacy, and practice.

show abstract

“…The study of a Precaution Adoption Process Model-guided report back intervention reported here was part of a larger randomized controlled trial (RCT) with promising results on stage of action over time [12]. The larger RCT intervention tested the impact of providing free home testing for radon and air nicotine, coupled with personalized report back of actual testing values on stage of action to mitigate for radon and restrict secondhand smoke exposure in the home [12][13][14]. The report back portion of the process included a 20 to 25 min telephonic, problem-solving session using a standardized protocol to assess stage of action and deliver queries and messages tailored to the stage to guide the strategies for lowering radon (mitigation) and secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure (adopting a smoke-free home) [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of Theory-Driven Report Back to Promote Lung Cancer Risk Reduction

Huntington‐Moskos

Rayens

Wiggins

et al. 2021

IJERPH

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Report back is active sharing of research findings with participants to prompt behavior change. Research on theory-driven report back for environmental risk reduction is limited. The study aim is to evaluate the impact of a stage-tailored report back process with participants who had high home radon and/or air nicotine levels. An observational one-group pre-post design was used, with data collection at 3, 9, and 15 months post intervention. Participants from the parent study (N = 515) were randomized to the treatment or control group and this sample included all 87 treatment participants who: (1) had elevated radon and/or air nicotine at baseline; and (2) received stage-tailored report back of their values. Short-term test kits measured radon; passive airborne nicotine samplers assessed secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure. Stage of action was categorized as: (1) ‘Unaware,’ (2) ‘Unengaged,’ (3) ‘Deciding,’ (4) ‘Action,’ and (5) ‘Maintenance.’ Interventions were provided for free, such as in-person radon and SHS test kits and a brief telephonic problem-solving consultation. Stage of action for radon mitigation and smoke-free policy increased from baseline to 3 months and remained stable between 3 and 9 months. Stage of action for radon was higher at 15 months than baseline. Among those with high baseline radon, observed radon decreased by 15 months (p < 0.001). Tailored report back of contaminant values reduced radon exposure and changed the health behavior necessary to remediate radon and SHS exposure.

show abstract

Radon, Secondhand Smoke, and Children in the Home: Creating a Teachable Moment for Lung Cancer Prevention

Cited by 13 publications

References 25 publications

Radon, an invisible killer in Canadian homes: perceptions of Ottawa-Gatineau residents

Radon, an invisible killer in Canadian homes: perceptions of Ottawa-Gatineau residents

Nursing strategies for environmental justice: A scoping review

Use of Theory-Driven Report Back to Promote Lung Cancer Risk Reduction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About