Minnesota's Smokefree Policies

Impact on Cessation Program Participants


      Smokefree policies are enacted to protect individuals from secondhand smoke; however, these laws may have broader cessation effects.


      This study investigated the relationship between Minnesota's local and statewide smokefree policies and quitting outcomes among cessation program enrollees.


      Data were collected from 2006 to 2008 from two groups of participants (n=1644 pre–statewide law; n=1273 post–statewide law) and analyzed in 2009. Website enrollees were surveyed by Internet or telephone 6 months post-enrollment. Others were surveyed by telephone 7 months post-enrollment.


      Those who enrolled in a cessation program after the statewide smokefree law were more likely to quit (p<0.05, relative risk [RR]=1.15) and were predicted to achieve a 30-day abstinence rate 4.1 percentage points greater than that achieved by those who quit pre–statewide law (30.9% vs 26.8%, respectively). Participants who quit post–statewide law were less likely to relapse and were predicted to have a relapse rate 6.4 percentage points below those who quit pre–statewide law (p<0.05, RR=0.87). Each additional year residing in or adjacent to a county with a local smokefree ordinance in place, up until the time of the statewide law, reduced the likelihood of achieving abstinence post–statewide law (p<0.001, RR=0.92) and increased the likelihood of relapse and the predicted relapse rate (p<0.05, RR=1.05).


      Abstinence and relapse rates for those enrolling in cessation programs appeared more favorable after the implementation of Minnesota's statewide smokefree law, suggesting that smokefree policies may have a small but beneficial impact on cessation outcomes. Previous exposure to local smokefree ordinances may lessen this effect.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to American Journal of Preventive Medicine
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • CDC
        State smokefree laws for worksites, restaurants, and bars—United States, 2000–2010.
        MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011; 60: 472-475
        • American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation
        Overview list—how many smokefree laws?.
      1. WHO Report on the Global Tobacco Epidemic, 2009; Implementing smokefree environments.
        World Health Organization, Geneva2009
        • Callinan J.
        • Clarke A.
        • Doherty K.
        • Kelleher C.
        Legislative smoking bans for reducing secondhand smoke exposure, smoking prevalence and tobacco consumption.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010; 4 (CD005992)
      2. International Agency for Research on Cancer. Evaluating the effectiveness of smokefree policies, 2009. IARC Handbooks on Cancer Prevention: Tobacco Control, Vo. 13. Lyon, France: IARC.

        • Hopkins D.P.
        • Razi S.
        • Leeks K.D.
        • et al.
        Smokefree policies to reduce tobacco use: a systematic review.
        Am J Prev Med. 2010; 38: S275-S289
        • Frieden T.R.
        • Mostashari F.
        • Kerker B.D.
        • Miller N.
        • Hajat A.
        • Frankel M.
        Adult tobacco use levels after intensive tobacco control measures: New York City, 2002–2003.
        Am J Public Health. 2005; 95: 1016-1023
        • Fong G.T.
        • Hyland A.
        • Borland R.
        • et al.
        Reductions in tobacco smoke pollution and increases in support for smokefree public places following the implementation of comprehensive smokefree workplace legislation in the Republic of Ireland: findings from the ITC Ireland/UK Survey.
        Tob Control. 2006; 15: iii51-iii58
        • Hackshaw L.
        • McEwen A.
        • West R.
        • Bauld L.
        Quit attempts in response to smokefree legislation in England.
        Tob Control. 2010; 19: 160-164
        • Shields M.
        Smoking bans: influence on smoking prevalence.
        Health Rep. 2007; 18: 9-24
        • Kim B.
        Workplace smoking ban policy and smoking behavior.
        J Prev Med Public Health. 2009; 42: 293-297
        • Edwards R.
        • Thomson G.
        • Wilson N.
        • et al.
        After the smoke has cleared: evaluation of the impact of a new national smokefree law in New Zealand.
        Tob Control. 2008; 17: e2
        • Wilson N.
        • Sertsou G.
        • Edwards R.
        • Thomson G.
        • Grigg M.
        • Li J.
        A new national smokefree law increased calls to a national quitline.
        BMC Public Health. 2007; 7: 75
        • Chan S.S.
        • Wong D.C.
        • Fong D.Y.
        • et al.
        Short-term impact of new smokefree legislation on the utilization of a quitline in Hong Kong.
        Nicotine Tob Res. 2009; 11: 356-361
        • Hahn E.J.
        Smokefree legislation: a review of health and economic outcomes research.
        Am J Prev Med. 2010; 39: S66-S76
        • Grassi M.C.
        • Enea D.
        • Ferketich A.K.
        • Lu B.
        • Nencini P.
        A smoking ban in public places increases the efficacy of bupropion and counseling on cessation outcomes at 1 year.
        Nicotine Tob Res. 2009; 11: 1114-1121
        • Fiore M.
        • Roberto Jaen C.
        • Baker T.
        • et al.
        Treating tobacco use and dependence: 2008 update.
        DHHS, Public Health Service, Rockville MD2008
        • CDC
        Decrease in smoking prevalence—Minnesota, 1999–2010.
        MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011; 60: 138-141
        • Bernat D.H.
        • Erickson D.J.
        • Shi Q.
        • Fabian L.E.
        • Forster J.L.
        Short-term effects of a comprehensive, statewide smokefree law on perceived opportunities to smoke.
        Am J Prev Med. 2010; 39: S23-S29
        • Schroeder S.A.
        • Morris C.D.
        Confronting a neglected epidemic: tobacco cessation for persons with mental illnesses and substance abuse problems.
        Annu Rev Public Health. 2010; 31: 297-314