MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross- sectional study was conducted among 286 non-smokers from two healthcare training centres and two nearby colleges in Malaysia from January 2015 to April 2015. A standardized questionnaire was administered via staff and student emails. The questionnaire collected information on sociodemographic characteristics, support for a tobacco-free policy and perceived respiratory and sensory symptoms due to tobacco exposure. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to estimate the independent effects of supporting a tobacco-free campus.
RESULTS: The percentage of individuals supporting completely tobacco-free facilities was 83.2% (N=238), as opposed to 16.7% (N=48) in support of partially tobacco-free facilities. Compared to the supporters of partially tobacco-free facilities, non-smokers who supported completely tobacco-free health facilities were more likely to be female, have higher education levels, to be very concerned about the effects of other people smoking on their health and to perceive a tobacco-free policy as very important. In addition, they perceived that tobacco smoke bothered them at work by causing headaches and coughs and, in the past 4 weeks, had experienced difficulty breathing. In the multivariate model, after adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and other factors, only experiencing coughs and headaches increased the odds of supporting a completely tobacco-free campus, up to 2.5- and 1.9-fold, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Coughs and headaches due to other people smoking at work enhances support for a completely tobacco-free campus among non-smokers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 81 cases of oral cancers were matched with 162 controls in this hospital-based study. Information on sociodemographic characteristics and details of risk habits (duration, frequency and type of tobacco consumption and betel quid chewing) were collected. Association between smoking and betel quid chewing with oral cancer were analysed using conditional logistic regression.
RESULTS: Slightly more than half of the cases (55.6%) were smokers where 88.9% of them smoked kretek. After adjusting for confounders, smokers have two fold increased risk, while the risk for kretek consumers and those smoking for more than 10 years was increased to almost three-fold. Prevalence of betel quid chewing among cases and controls was low (7.4% and 1.9% respectively). Chewing of at least one quid per day, and quid combination of betel leaf, areca nut, lime and tobacco conferred a 5-6 fold increased risk.
CONCLUSIONS: Smoking is positively associated with oral cancer risk. A similar direct association was also seen among betel quid chewers.